Gene expression and cytosine DNA methylation alterations in induced pluripotent stem-cell-derived human hepatocytes treated with low doses of chemical carcinogens
The increasing number of man-made chemicals in the environment that may pose a carcinogenic risk emphasizes the need to develop reliable time- and cost-effective approaches for carcinogen detection. To address this issue, we have investigated the utility of human hepatocytes for the in vitro identification of genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. Induced pluripotent stem-cell (iPSC)-derived human hepatocytes were treated with the genotoxic carcinogens aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) and benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P), the non-genotoxic liver carcinogen methapyrilene, and the non-carcinogens aflatoxin B2 (AFB2) and benzo[e]pyrene (B[e]P) at non-cytotoxic concentrations for 7 days, and transcriptomic and DNA methylation profiles were examined. 1569, 1693, and 2061 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were detected in cells treated with AFB1, B[a]P, and methapyrilene, respectively, whereas no DEGs were found in cells treated with AFB2 or B[e]P. In contrast to the profound cellular transcriptomic responses, exposure of iPSC-derived hepatocytes to the test chemicals resulted in minor random alterations in global DNA methylome, most of which were not associated with changes in gene expression. Overall, our results demonstrate that the major non-genotoxic effect of exposure to carcinogens, regardless of their mode of action, is a profound global transcriptomic response rather than global DNA methylome alterations, indicating the significance of transcriptomic alterations as an informative endpoint in short-term in vitro carcinogen testing.
KeywordsChemical carcinogens In vitro iPSC-derived human hepatocytes Gene expression DNA methylation
This work was partly supported by appointment (BBM) to the Postgraduate Research Program at the NCTR administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have declared no potential conflict of interest.
- Ates G, Mertens B, Heymans A, Verschaeve L, Milushev D, Vanparys P, Roosens NHC, De Keersmaecker SCJ, Rogiers V, Doktorova TY (2018) A novel genotoxin-specific qPCR array based on the metabolically competent human HepaRG™ cell line as a rapid and reliable tool for improved in vitro hazard assessment. Arch Toxicol 92:1593–1608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bell CC, Lauschke VM, Vorrink SU, Palmgren H, Duffin R, Andersson TB, Ingelman-Sundberg M (2017) Transcriptional, functional, and mechanistic comparisons of stem cell-derived hepatocytes, HepaRG cells, and three-dimensional human hepatocyte spheroids as predictive in vitro systems for drug-induced liver injury. Drug Metab Dispos 45:419–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 57:289–300Google Scholar
- Borowa-Mazgaj B, de Conti A, Tryndyak V, Steward CR, Jimenez L, Melnyk S, Seneshaw M, Mirshahi F, Rusyn I, Beland FA, Sanyal AJ, Pogribny IP (2019) Gene expression and DNA methylation alterations in the glycine N-methyltransferase gene in diet induced nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-associated carcinogenesis. Toxicol Sci 170:273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cancerprogressreport.org (2018) [internet] American Association for Cancer Research, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- Fang H, Harris SC, Su Z, Chen M. Qian F, Shi L, Perkins R, Tong W (2017) ArrayTrack: an FDA and public genomic tool. In: Tatarinova TV and Nikolsky Y (eds) Biological networks and pathway analysis. Methods Mol Biol vol 1613. pp. 333–353Google Scholar
- Herceg Z, Ghantous A, Wild CP, Sklias A, Casati L, Duthie SJ, Fry R, Issa J-P, Kellermayer R, Koturbash I, Kondo Y, Lepeule J, Lima SCS, Marsit CJ, Rakyan V, Saffery R, Taylor JA, Teschendorff AE, Ushijima T, Vineis P, Walker CL, Waterland RA, Wiemels J, Ambatipudi S, Degli Esposti D, Hernandez-Vargas H (2018) Roadmap for investigating epigenome deregulation and environmental origins of cancer. Int J Cancer 142:874–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jennings P, Weiland C, Limonciel A, Bloch KM, Radford R, Aschauer L, McMorrow T, Wilmes A, Pfaller W, Ahr HJ, Slattery C, Lock EA, Ryan MP, Ellinger-Ziegelbauer H (2012) Transcriptomic alterations induced by Ochtatoxin A in rat and human proximal tubular in vitro models and comparison to a rat in vivo model. Arch Toxicol 86:571–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Li H-H, Chen R, Hyduke DR, Williams A, Frötschl R, Ellinger-Ziegelbauer H, O’Lone R, Yauk CL, Aubrecht J, Fornace AJ Jr (2017) Development and validation of a high-throughput transcriptomic biomarker to address 21st century genetic toxicology needs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114:E10881–E10889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ramaiahgari SC, Auerbach SS, Saddler TO, Rice JR, Dunlap PE, Sipes NS, DeVito MJ, Shah RR, Bushel PR, Merrick BA, Paules RS, Ferguson SS (2019) The power of resolution: contextualized understanding of biological responses to liver injury chemicals using high-throughput transcriptomics and benchmark concentration modeling. Toxicol Sci 169:553–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wilde EC, Chapman KE, Stannard LM, Seager AL, Brüsehafer K, Shah U-K, Tonkin JA, Brown MR, Verma JR, Doherty AT, Johnson GE, Doak SH, Jenkins GJS (2018) A novel, integrated in vitro carcinogenicity test to identify genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens using human lymphoblastoid cells. Arch Toxicol 92:935–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- World Cancer Report (2014) Stewart BW, Wild CP (eds) International Agency for Research on Cancer, LyonGoogle Scholar