Longitudinal analysis identifies gene expression changes in future asthmatics compared to healthy children, suggesting early intervention opportunities.
Rationale Early childhood represents a critical window for asthma susceptibility, marked by developmental and molecular changes, yet their longitudinal pattern remains unclear.Objectives To identify differences in longitudinal whole-blood gene expression during early childhood in future asthmatics compared to healthy children.Methods We conducted a longitudinal whole-blood transcriptomic analysis at four timepoints (1, 4.5, 6, 10.5 years) in a sample of the birth cohort PASTURE (n = 378), comparing children who developed asthma between 6 and 10.5 years with non-asthmatic controls (83/295). Analyses included longitudinal differential gene expression, weighted gene co-expression network analysis, and cis-eQTL analysis.Measurements And Main Results At age 1, 42 genes, mostly upregulated in future asthmatics, were associated with neutrophilic inflammation and NLRP3 inflammasome-markers. By 4.5 years, this shifted to a novel eosinophil-related signature (40 genes), remaining increased in asthmatics until 10.5 years. Co-expression analysis confirmed a neutrophilic module at 1 year and eosinophilic modules at 4.5, 6 and 10.5 years, all associated with asthma. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide was associated with the eosinophilic module at age 6 (P = .003). 86 SNPs were identified modulating the expression of 10 eosinophil-associated genes and GSDMB from this eosinophilic signature. A variant-based genetic risk score was associated with asthma diagnosis (aOR[95% CI]= 1.47[1.13-1.93]).Conclusion We identified a shift from a neutrophil-driven gene signature at age 1 to a persistent eosinophilic signature at 4.5 to 10.5 years in asthmatic children, highlighting the 1 to 4.5-year period as most vulnerable period. Genetic variants strongly influenced the persistent eosinophilic gene signature, comprising potential novel therapeutic targets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Foppiano et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: