Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2025
Absorbent Microbiopsy Sampling and RNA Extraction for Minimally Invasive, Simultaneous Blood and Skin Analysis
Published on: February 21, 2019
Unravelling morphoea aetiopathogenesis by next-generation sequencing of paired skin biopsies
Amanda M Saracino1,2,3, Daniel Kelberman4, Georg W Otto4
1Division of Medicine, Centre for Rheumatology and Connective Tissues Diseases, University College London, London, UK. amanda@dramandasaracino.com.au.
Background:
Morphoea can have a significant disease burden. Aetiopathogenesis remains poorly understood, with very limited existing genetic studies. Linear morphoea (LM) may follow Blascho's lines of epidermal development, providing potential pathogenic clues.
Objective:
The first objective of this study was to identify the presence of primary somatic epidermal mosaicism in LM. The second objective was tTo explore differential gene expression in morphoea epidermis and dermis to identify potential pathogenic molecular pathways and tissue layer cross-talk.
Methodology:
Skin biopsies from paired affected and contralateral unaffected skin were taken from 16 patients with LM. Epidermis and dermis were isolated using a 2-step chemical-physical separation protocol. Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS; n = 4 epidermal) and RNA-seq (n = 5-epidermal, n = 5-dermal) with gene expression analysis via GSEA-MSigDBv6.3 and PANTHER-v14.1 pathway analyses, were performed. RTqPCR and immunohistochemistry were used to replicate key results.
Results:
Sixteen participants (93.8% female, mean age 27.7 yrs disease-onset) were included. Epidermal WGS identified no single affected gene or SNV. However, many potential disease-relevant pathogenic variants were present, including ADAMTSL1 and ADAMTS16. A highly proliferative, inflammatory and profibrotic epidermis was seen, with significantly-overexpressed TNFα-via-NFkB, TGFβ, IL6/JAKSTAT and IFN-signaling, apoptosis, p53 and KRAS-responses. Upregulated IFI27 and downregulated LAMA4 potentially represent initiating epidermal 'damage' signals and enhanced epidermal-dermal communication. Morphoea dermis exhibited significant profibrotic, B-cell and IFN-signatures, and upregulated morphogenic patterning pathways such as Wnt.
Conclusion:
This study supports the absence of somatic epidermal mosaicism in LM, and identifies potential disease-driving epidermal mechanisms, epidermal-dermal interactions and disease-specific dermal differential-gene-expression in morphoea. We propose a potential molecular narrative for morphoea aetiopathogenesis which could help guide future targeted studies and therapies.
