Review Topical Sections

The epigenetic landscape of innate immunity

  • The inflammatory response is the first line of defense against infectious agents or tissue damage. Innate immune cells are the crucial effectors regulating the different phase of inflammation. Their ability to timely develop an immune response is tightly controlled by the interplay of transcriptional and epigenetic mechanisms. The immunological imprinting elicited by exposure to different concentrations and types of infectious agents determine the functional fate of immune cells, forming the basis of innate immune memory. In this review we highlight the best-characterized examples of gene reprogramming occurring during different phases of inflammation with particular emphasis on the epigenetic marks that determine the specificity of the immune response. We further review the potential of cutting edge experimental techniques that have recently helped to reveal the deep complexity of epigenetic regulation during the inflammatory response.

    Citation: Mariacristina De Luca, Kevin Pels, Susana Moleirinho, Graziella Curtale. The epigenetic landscape of innate immunity[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2017, 4(1): 110-139. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2017.1.110

    Related Papers:

    [1] Lina Zhang, Jing Zhang, Jiaqi Sun, Qingpeng Chen . A global progressive image secret sharing scheme under multi-group joint management. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(1): 1286-1304. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024055
    [2] Xiaoping Li, Yanjun Liu, Hefeng Chen, Chin-Chen Chang . A novel secret sharing scheme using multiple share images. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6350-6366. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019317
    [3] Feng Liu, Xuehu Yan, Lintao Liu, Yuliang Lu, Longdan Tan . Weighted visual secret sharing with multiple decryptions and lossless recovery. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 5750-5764. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019287
    [4] Guozheng Yang, Lintao Liu, Xuehu Yan . A compressed secret image sharing method with shadow image verification capability. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(4): 4295-4316. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020237
    [5] Li-na Zhang, Jia-qi Sun, Xiao-yu Zhang, Qing-peng Chen, Jing Zhang . Two-level QR code scheme based on region matrix image secret sharing algorithm. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(9): 16678-16704. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023743
    [6] Jingju Liu, Lei Sun, Jinrui Liu, Xuehu Yan . Fake and dishonest participant location scheme in secret image sharing. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(3): 2473-2495. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021126
    [7] Li-na Zhang, Chen-yu Cui, Xiao-yu Zhang, Wei Wu . Adaptive visual cryptography scheme design based on QR codes. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 12160-12179. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022566
    [8] Yanjun Liu, Chin-Chen Chang, Peng-Cheng Huang . Security protection using two different image shadows with authentication. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(4): 1914-1932. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019093
    [9] Xingxing Jia, Yixuan Song, Daoshun Wang, Daxin Nie, Jinzhao Wu . A collaborative secret sharing scheme based on the Chinese Remainder Theorem. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(3): 1280-1299. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019062
    [10] Song Wan, Guozheng Yang, Lanlan Qi, Longlong Li , Xuehu Yan, Yuliang Lu . Multiple security anti-counterfeit applications to QR code payment based on visual secret sharing and QR code. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6367-6385. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019318
  • The inflammatory response is the first line of defense against infectious agents or tissue damage. Innate immune cells are the crucial effectors regulating the different phase of inflammation. Their ability to timely develop an immune response is tightly controlled by the interplay of transcriptional and epigenetic mechanisms. The immunological imprinting elicited by exposure to different concentrations and types of infectious agents determine the functional fate of immune cells, forming the basis of innate immune memory. In this review we highlight the best-characterized examples of gene reprogramming occurring during different phases of inflammation with particular emphasis on the epigenetic marks that determine the specificity of the immune response. We further review the potential of cutting edge experimental techniques that have recently helped to reveal the deep complexity of epigenetic regulation during the inflammatory response.


    Secret image sharing (SIS) belongs to but differs from secret sharing, and image is widely used and covers many privacies [2,1], thus, SIS should be specially studied and designed. In a (k,n) threshold SIS scheme, it aims at splitting a secret image into n shadows, i.e., shares or shadow images, which are then assigned to n participants. The secret can be disclosed by any k or more shadows while less than k shadows gain nothing of the secret. SIS can be applied to many scenarios, such as key management, access control, information hiding, authentication, watermarking, transmitting passwords, and distributed storage and computing in cloud computing [3,4,5,6,7,8]. In the field of SIS research, there are mainly Shamir's polynomial-based scheme [9] and visual secret sharing (VSS) [10] also called visual cryptography scheme (VCS) [11].

    Shamir's original polynomial-based SIS [9,12] for (k,n) threshold splits a secret image into the constant coefficient of a random (k1)-degree polynomial to generate n shadows, which are then assigned to n participants. The secret image can be disclosed with high-resolution by means of Lagrange interpolation with any k or more shadows. Inspired by Shamir's original scheme, some researchers [13,14,15,16,17,18] proposed more polynomial-based schemes to possess more features. Although polynomial-based SIS only needs k shadows for disclosing the distortion-less secret image, it has high computational complexity because of Lagrange interpolation and "all-or-nothing".

    In (k,n) threshold VSS [19,20,21,22,23,24], the outputted n shadows are printed onto transparencies and then assigned to n participants. The beauty of VSS is that the secret image is disclosed by superposing any k or more shadows with human native eyes and no cryptographic computation. Collecting less than k shadows will in general give no clue about the secret image even a watchdog owns infinite computation power. Unfortunately, original VSS suffers from codebook design, pixel expansion problem, low contrast and "all-or-nothing", which are taken into account by the following works [23,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]. Furthermore, most of the existing VSS schemes have limitations of lossy recovery and "all-or-nothing" [29,33,34].

    In contrast to "all-or-nothing", progressive secret image sharing (PSIS) [33,35,36,37,38] achieves the characteristic that the more shadows the better disclosed secret image quality. PSIS is useful in many multimedia applications, such as art work image vending, Pay-TV/Music, multi-level representation and degraded encryption, where we need to intentionally disclose the multimedia with a degraded but recognizable quality so as to protect the details in addition to multimedia content. Unfortunately, conventional PSIS may be lossy recovery. Progressiveness can be divided into global progressiveness and regional progressiveness. Global progressive PSIS mainly protects the detail of the secret image progressively, while regional progressive PSIS mainly protects the secret image region by region. Since the paper intends to protect the detail of the secret image, we focus on global progressiveness in this article. However, PSIS is mainly for (k,n) threshold, where lossless recovery is seldom achieved.

    Based on above analyses, conventional SIS has the drawback of "all-or-nothing" and conventional PSIS has the limitation of lossy recovery. Thus, we intend to propose ramp SIS which achieves both progressive and lossless recovery by a unique disclosing method.

    In this article, first we introduce ramp SIS definition according to image features and ramp secret sharing [39,40,41]. Then we propose (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS based on the Chinese remainder theorem (CRT) [42,43,44]. In the proposed ramp, i.e., (k1,k2,n) threshold, CRT-based SIS, when we collect any k1 or more and less than k2 shadows, the secret image will be disclosed in a progressive way [45]. On the other hand, when we collect any k2 or more shadows, the secret image will be disclosed losslessly. Furthermore, the disclosing method is only modular arithmetic resulting in ability in real-time application. We give theoretical analyses and experiments to display the effectiveness of our method.

    Our method allows the purchaser to review the secret with a degraded quality by collecting less shadows prior to buying them. Then the purchaser can obtain the lossless version by collecting more shadows after he decides to buy it. Image generally differs from data, thus the progressive feature with poor quality of image makes sense to some applicable scenarios. The progressive feature achieves that the quality of the image can be partially degraded. Such perceptibility makes it possible for the potential purchasers to view low-quality copies of the image prior to buying them.

    A detailed scenario is given as follows. In the process of displaying and selling an art image, since the details are very important for the art image, details should be protected. After sharing the art image once, the owner can disclose and present different image qualities to different people on different occasions, instead of sharing again. For example, in an exhibition, first the owner can demonstrate a low quality of the art image with any k1 or more shadows to prove the copyright of the art, then after reaching a purchase agreement he shows the lossless quality with any k2 or more shadows.

    The detailed advantages and contributions of the proposed approach are as follows.

    1. A formal definition of ramp SIS is first introduced.

    2. (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS based on CRT is proposed. We use CRT due to the following advantages comparing to polynomial-based SIS. On one hand, CRT-based SIS can achieve lossless recovery, while most of the polynomial-based SIS schemes are in general lossy. On the other hand, the disclosed operation of polynomial-based SIS is Lagrange's interpolation (O(klog2k)), while that of CRT-based SIS is only modular operation (O(k)) [44], therefore, CRT-based SIS has lower computational cost than polynomial-based SIS to disclose the secret image.

    3. The secret image is decoded by only modular operation. When we collect any k2 or more shadows, the secret image will be disclosed losslessly, which outperforms polynomial-based SIS due to lossy recovery for secret pixel value larger than 250 if 251 is selected as the prime value in polynomial-based SIS.

    The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces ramp SIS definition and some basic requirements for the proposed method. In section 3, the proposed method and its analyses are presented in detail. Section 4 gives the security analyses of typical SIS schemes. Section 4 is devoted to experimental results. Finally, section 5 concludes this paper.

    In this section, we will give some preliminaries. In conventional (k,n) threshold SIS, an original secret image S is encrypted into n shadows SC1,SC2,SCn, and the decrypted secret image S is disclosed from any t (ktn,tZ+) shadows.

    CRT was first exploited in the Western han dynasty of China as well as formally introduced in the southern and northern dynasties. It intends to solve a set of linear congruence equations.

    When we choose a set of integers mi(i=1,2,,k) satisfying gcd(mi,mj)=1,ij, then there is a unique solution y(a1M1M11+a2M2M12++akMkM1k)(modM), y[0,M1]) to Eq. (2.1).

    ya1(modm1)ya2(modm2)yak1(modmk1)yak(modmk) (2.1)

    where M=ki=1mi, Mi=M/mi and MiM1i1(modmi).

    Proof. Since gcd(mi,mj)=1,ij, gcd(mi,Mi)=1 and we have M1i subject to MiM1i1(modmi).

    For a1M1M11, we have

    aiMiM1iai(modmi),ij (2.2)
    aiMiM1iai(modmj), (2.3)

    According to Eqs. (2.2) and (2.3), y(a1M1M11+a2M2M12++akMkM1k)(modM), y[0,M1] subject to Eq. (2.1).

    Thus, on one hand, y is one solution to Eq. (2.1).

    On the other hand, if both y1 and y2 are solutions to Eq. (2.1), we have y1y20(modmi). Since gcd(mi,mj)=1,ij, M is exactly divided by y1y2. In addition, y is one solution to Eq. (2.1), thus, the set of solutions to Eq. (2.1) is {zM+y|zZ}.

    Therefore, there is a unique solution y(a1M1M11+a2M2M12++akMkM1k)(modM), y[0,M1]) to Eq. (2.1).

    CRT will be utilized in the proposed scheme to possess (kx,n) threshold, where 2k1kxk2n. Both Polynomial-based SIS and CRT-based SIS are well studied. We use CRT in our scheme due to the following advantages and differences.

    ● The shadow size of polynomial-based SIS is easier to be reduced.

    ● CRT-based SIS easily achieves lossless reconstruction, while most polynomial-based SIS schemes are not lossless.

    ● The disclosing operation is Lagrange's interpolation (O(klog2k) in polynomial-based SIS, while that is modular operation (O(k) [46]) in CRT-based SIS, thus CRT-based SIS has lower computational complexity than polynomial-based SIS to disclose the secret image.

    ● The principle of CRT-based SIS is complex and hard to be understood.

    ● The number of owners is in general not limited in polynomial-based SIS, while that in CRT-based SIS is small like n ≤ 6, because as n increases the available value of mi decreases, which will affect the distribution of the values of the shadow pixels and therefore further may lead to secure issue.

    Digital image differs from pure electronic data, where the differences mainly have:

    ● An image includes many pixels, which have correlations between adjacent ones, such as structure, texture, edge and other related information. The correlations are important to security and hence need to be considered in SIS algorithm design. Thus, SIS should encrypt not only the pixel values but also the correlations between adjacent pixels.

    ● There are lots of pixels in an image so that computational complexity of SIS should be considered.

    ● An image owns special file storage structure. Using grayscale image as an example, its pixel value is in the range of [0,255], which should be satisfied in SIS design, e.g., the output value, the input value, and other relative parameters, should lie in the range. For example, the secret pixel value range and the shadow pixel value range should not exceed the range. In addition, we have mi256 when applying to CRT.

    ● An image is a specific form of the data, where each grayscale (binary) pixel is represented as one byte (bit), so SIS is easily to be applied to secret sharing.

    ● In general, secret data is available only if it is losslessly recovered. Whereas, an image may be useful when recovered with some errors because of human eyes' low pass filter feature, thus, progressiveness makes sense to SIS.

    The above differences lead to that in general traditional secret sharing cannot be directly applied to SIS. In particular, CRT-based ramp secret sharing cannot be directly applied to CRT-based ramp SIS.

    Definition 1. A SIS splits a secret image, denoted as S, into n shadow images, denoted as SC1,SC2,SCn. We say the SIS is a (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS subject to:

    security condition. The secret image cannot be reconstructed with any less than k1 shares.

    ramp recovery condition. The secret image will be reconstructed progressively with any k1 or more and less than k2 shares. The reconstructed image quality increases with the number of shares from k1 to k2.

    decodable condition. The secret image is decoded with any k2 or more shares.

    If k1=k2=k, (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS will reduce to (k,n)-threshold SIS. The ramp SIS is called linear ramp SIS if the reconstructed image quality increases linearly with the number of shares from k1 to k2.

    In VSS, contrast is generally used, which is also adopted in this paper to evaluate the quality in VSS. In polynomial-based SIS, in general due to lossless recovery the metrics are seldom considered. In the research field of image processing, there are many metrics to evaluate image quality, where some typical metrics will be directly adopted in this paper.

    The visual quality in VSS, which can decide how well human eyes can recognize the disclosed image, of the disclosed secret image S corresponding to secret image S can be overall evaluated by contrast as follows [28].

    Definition 2.

    α=P0P11+P1=P(S[AS0]=0)P(S[AS1]=0)1+P(S[AS1]=0) (2.4)

    Where α is contrast, P0 (resp., P1) means the probability of white pixels in the disclosed image S for the corresponding white (resp., black) area in secret image S, that is, P0 denotes correctly decrypted probability corresponding to white area in secret image S, and P1 denotes wrongly decrypted probability corresponding to black area in secret image S.

    Since lossless disclose or nothing, i.e., "all-or-nothing", conventional SIS for grayscale image omits to discuss quality evaluation of disclosed secret image. Progressiveness differs from "all-or-nothing", therefore, we should discuss the quality evaluation of the disclosed gray secret image. The following typical objective metrics will be adopted to evaluate the image quality between S and S.

    1. Peak signal-to-noise-ratio (PSNR): PSNR, in Eq. (2.5), between the primary image I with size of M×N and modified image I is adopted to measure the image similarity, where MSE as Eq. (2.6) denotes the mean square error.

    PSNR=10log10(2552MSE)dB (2.5)
    MSE=1M×NMi=1Nj=1[I(i,j)I(i,j)]2 (2.6)

    2. Structural similarity index measure (SSIM) [47] is to assess the visual impact of three characteristics in an image, i.e., luminance, contrast and structure, which gains a multiplicative combination of the above three terms, as Eq. (2.7). The value of SSIM is in -1 and 1. The larger SSIM results in higher image similarity.

    SSIM(x,y)=[l(x,y)]α[c(x,y)]β[s(x,y)]γ (2.7)

    where

    l(x,y)=2μxμy+C1μ2x+μ2y+C1c(x,y)=2σxσy+C2σ2x+σ2y+C2s(x,y)=2σxy+C3σxσy+C3

    μx,μy,σx,σy,andσxy are the local means, standard deviations, and cross-covariance for images x,y. In this paper, we set C3=C22,α=β=γ=1.

    3. NC is to evaluate the quality between the original secret image and the disclosed secret image, as Eq. (2.8).

    NC(I,I)=1Mi=1Nj=1I2(i,j)Mi=1Nj=1I(i,j)×I(i,j) (2.8)

    4. The universal quality index (UQI) [48] can reflect the distortion of the disclosed secret image with its original secret image, whose value is between -1 and 1. The larger UQI means better quality. The block size of UQI is 8 in this paper. For details please refer to [48].

    In addition, contrast can decide how well human eyes recognize the disclosed binary secret, so that it is expected to be as great as possible to obtain better visual quality. About how the contrast values map to the quality of the disclosed image, please refer to [49]. Herein, in order to show some intuitions about the expected performance, we have the followings.

    1. When α [0, 0.03], one cannot recognize the secret image.

    2. When α (0.03, 0.14], one can see a little information of the secret image.

    3. When α (0.14, 0.21], the secret image is recognized with acceptable quality.

    4. When α (0.21, 1], the secret image is fast recognized with good quality.

    About how the PSNR values map to the image quality [50], we may refer to the followings.

    1. When PSNR [28.5, +], the image quality is very good.

    2. When PSNR [23.0, 28.5), the image quality is good.

    3. When PSNR [19.5, 23.0), the image quality is medium.

    4. When PSNR [17.0, 19.5), the image quality is poor.

    5. When PSNR [0, 17.0), the image quality is bad.

    Algorithm 1. The proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS
    Input: A secret image S with size of H×W and threshold parameters (k1,k2,n), where 2k1k2n.
    Output: n shadows SC1,SC2,SCn and corresponding private integers m1,m2,mn.
    Step 1: Choose a set of integers {128p<m1<m2<mn256} to satisfy
    1. gcd(mi,mj)=1,ij.
    2. gcd(mi,p)=1 for i=1,2,,n.
    3. Mkx>pNkx for any 2k1kxk2.
    where Mkx=kxi=1mi, Nkx=kx1i=1mni+1 and p is public.
    Step 2: Calculate Tkx=[Mkxp1Nkxp2+Nkxp] for kx=k1,k1+1,k2 and Tkx is public as well among all the participants. For each coordinate (h,w){(h,w)|1hH,1wW}, repeat Steps 3-5.
    Step 3:For now processing pixel value s=S(h,w), we select randomly a threshold kx in [k1,k2].
    Step 4:If 0x<p, randomly pick up an integer A in [Tkx+1,Mkxp1] and compute y=s+Ap.
    Else randomly pick up an integer A in [Nkxp,Tkx) and y=sp+Ap.
    Step 5:Calculate aiy(modmi) and compute SCi(h,w)=ai for i=1,2,,n.
    Step 6: Output n shadows SC1,SC2,SCn and their private corresponding integers m1,m2,mn.

    We give the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS based on CRT in Algorithm 1 with an original secret image S leading to n output shadows SC1,SC2,SCn and private corresponding integers m1,m2,mn. The recovery Steps are described in Algorithm 2.

    In Algorithm 1 and Algorithm 2, we find that.

    1. In Step 1 of the proposed Algorithm 1, {128p<m1<m2<mn256} is given due to image pixel value range and pNkx<Mkx. We suggest here that p is as small as possible for security and mi is as large as possible, thus, the pixel values of shadow will be randomly distributed in large range.

    2. gcd(mi,mj)=1 and gcd(mi,p)=1 intend to satisfy CRT conditions, where mi may be preserved as the private key for participant i or may be public. gcd(mi,p)=1 is on account of not only applicable CRT but also containing all possible pixel values in range [0,mi) for shadow SCi. We note that, our method can accommodate only a constant number of participants because in Step 1 of Algorithm 1 one has to choose n+1 integers between 128 and 256, which must be pairwise relatively prime and whose available numbers are more than 23 but less than 128. However, these numbers can satisfy general applications.

    Algorithm 2. Recovery for the proposed scheme.
    Input: t shadows SCi1,SCi2,SCit, their corresponding private integers mi1,mi2,mit, p and Tkx for kx=k1,k1+1,k2, where k1t.
    Output: A H × W disclosed secret image S.
    Step 1:For each coordinate (h,w){(h,w)|1hH,1wW}, repeat Steps 2-5.
    Step 2:Calculate aij=SCij(h,w) for j=1,2,,t. Let's solve the following linear equations according to CRT.

    y  ai1(modmi1)y  ai2(modmi2)          y  ail1(modmit1)y  ait(modmit)                                      (3.1)
    Step 3:Calculate T=yp.
    Step 4:For kx=k1,k1+1,k2, if TTkx, let skxy(modp); otherwise let skx=y(modp)+p.
    Step 5:kx=argminkx[k1,k2]{kx|skx=skx+1==smin(t,k2)}. Set S(h,w)=skx.
    Step 6:Output the disclosed secret image S.

    3. In Step 2 of Algorithm 1, Tkx divides interval [Nkxp,Mkxp1] into two parts with a view to classify 0x<p or px255 according to Step 4 of Algorithm 2. As a result, s can be losslessly disclosed for arbitrary x[0,255].

    4. In Step 4 of our Algorithm 1, we know A is randomly picked up from [Nkxp,Mkxp1], thus, Nkxy<Mkx in order to obtain (kx,n) threshold for y as explained in Section 2.1.

    5. In Step 4 of Algorithm 1, A is randomly selected for every secret pixel s, hence y=s+Ap can enlarge s value in order to scramble both the correlations between adjacent pixels and the secret pixel value without auxiliary encryption.

    6. In Step 4 of Algorithm 1, y=s+Ap and s<p will determine a unique s according to sy(modp).

    7. In the recovery phase, for the current processing location (h,w), we do not know its threshold, thus, in Steps 4–5 of Algorithm 2 we search for the minimum threshold satisfying losslessly recovering the original secret pixel s, denoted as kx.

    8. Our (k1,k2,n) threshold extension method may be also suitable for other SIS, such as polynomial-based SIS.

    Moreover, we explain the differences between Algorithm 1 and the classical ones as follows.

    1. Ramp SIS has not been formally introduced before our work.

    2. CRT is first applied to Algorithm 1 to achieve ramp SIS.

    3. Steps 1–4 of Algorithm 1 are different from the classical CRT-based SIS schemes since Steps 1–4 will achieve ramp SIS proved in Section 3.2.

    We will show performances of the proposed method by theoretically analyzing the security, visual recognition and valid ramp threshold construction. In Theorem 1, we will prove that the proposed scheme is a valid (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS construction. Prior to the proof of Theorem 1, some Lemmas are given. Without loss of generality, in the following analyses, we assume that kx=k0 threshold is selected in Step 3 of Algorithm 1 for now processing pixel value s=S(h,w).

    Lemma 1. Each shadow generated by our method gives no clue about the secret image.

    Proof.

    From y=s+Ap or y=sp+Ap and aiy(modmi), we will prove SCi(h,w)=ai is random in range [0,mi).

    If A is fixed, since s represents the pixel value of secret image, we assume s and sp is random in range [0,255]. Due to ai(s+Ap)(modmi), we have ai is random in range [0,mi).

    On the other hand, if s is fixed, gcd(mi,p)=1, thus, Ap(modmi) will cover all possible values in range [0,mi). We have s+Ap(modmi) will cover all possible values in range [0,mi) as well. As a result, we have ai is random in range [0,mi).

    Thus, the Lemma is proved to be met.

    Lemma 2. In the proposed scheme, any k0 or more shadow pixels can disclose the secret pixel losslessly.

    Proof. Since s represents the pixel value of secret image, we will prove any k0 or more shadows can disclose s losslessly.

    In order to disclose s, we only need to find y due to sy(modp) or sy(modp)+p.

    When ai1,ai2,aik0 are given, according to CRT, there exists only solution y modulo N1=k0j=1mij since N1Mk0. Finally we can uniquely determine y and thus, s based on Steps 4-5 of our Algorithm 2.

    Lemma 3. In the proposed scheme, any k01 or less shadows give no clue about secret.

    Proof. When k01 shadow pixels ai1,ai2,aik01 are given, according to CRT then all we have is y0 modulo N2=k01j=1mij, where y0[0,N21]. On one hand, the true y[Nk0,Mk01], which is absolutely different from y0. On the other hand, since Nk0N2, Nk0y<Mk0 and gcd(N2,p)=1, in [N2,Mk01], y0+bk01j=1mij for b=1,2,,mik01 are also the solutions for the collected k01 equations in Eq. (3.1). Thus, there are another mik01 solutions in [N2,Mk01], other than only one. Thus k01 or less shadows give no clue about secret.

    Theorem 1. Our method is a valid (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS construction.

    Proof. Based on the above Lemmas, we know for now processing pixel value s=S(h,w) (k0,n) threshold is achieved by our method.

    Since sc1,sc2,scn are generated according to the secret pixel s with (k0,n) threshold, we can disclose the secret s when we collect any k0 or more shadow pixels.

    Since in Step 3 of Algorithm 1, for every processing pixel value s=S(h,w), a threshold kx in [k1,k2] is selected randomly, when we collect more than k1 shadows, more secret pixels will be disclosed losslessly so that the progressive quality of disclosed secret image will be gained. On the other hand, when we collect any k2 or more shadows, every pixel of the secret image is disclosed losslessly, thus, the secret image is disclosed losslessly. As a result, our method is a valid (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS construction.

    In this section, experiments and analyses are taken into account to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed scheme.

    Figure 1 is one experimental result of our proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based SIS, where p=128,m1=245,m2=247,m3=249,m4=251,m5=253, k1=2,k2=4,n=5 and its employed grayscale secret image is in Figure 1(a). Figures 1(b–f) are the generated 5 shadows, which are noise-like. Figures 1(g–j) display the disclosed grayscale secret image with any t(2t5) shadows by our recovery method, where S1,2,,t is the disclosed secret image S from SC1,SC2,,SCt and for saving pages we only give the disclosed results with the first tth shadows. When more shadows are used, better disclosed secret image is obtained in [k1,k2], thus, the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS is progressive in [k1,k2]. The disclosed secret images with any k2 or more shadows, as Figures 1 (i)-(j), are the same as the original secret image in Figure 1 (a), since Hh=1Ww=1|S(h,w)S(h,w)|=0.

    Figure 1.  Simulation results of the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based PSIS, where k1=2,k2=4,n=5. (a) The grayscale secret image; (b) (f) five shadows SC1,SC2,SC3,SC4 and SC5; (g) (j) disclosed results by any t shadows, where t=2,3,4 and 5, respectively.

    Furthermore, progressive rate can be adopted to evaluate the progressive effect of the disclosed secret image [51]. In Figure 1, taking PSNR as an example, the progressive rate at t=2 is 3.0746 and the progressive rate at t=3 is +.

    In addition, Figure 2 shows shadows histogram analyses of proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS corresponding to Figure 1. For each shadow, the pixel values are approximately uniformly distributed in range [0,mi1], which tells that each shadow gives no clue about the secret image. In the following experiments, we will omit the shadows histogram analyses for saving pages.

    Figure 2.  Histogram analyses of shadows in Figure 1.

    Figure 3 is the further experimental result of our proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based SIS, where p=128,m1=245,m2=247,m3=249,m4=251,m5=253, k1=3,k2=5,n=5 and its employed grayscale secret image is in Figure 3(a). Figures 3(b–f) are the generated 5 shadows, which are noise-like. Figures 3(g–j) display the disclosed grayscale secret image with any t(2t5) shadows by our recovery method. When less than k1 shadows are inspected, nothing of the secret image can be obtained. When k1 or more shadows are collected, the secret image can be disclosed in a degree. When more shadows are used, better disclosed secret image is obtained as well in [k1,k2], thus, the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS is progressive in [k1,k2] as well. The disclosed secret images with any k2 shadows as Figure 3(j) is the same as the original secret image Figure 3(a) as well.

    Figure 3.  Simulation results of the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based PSIS, where k1=3,k2=5,n=5. (a) The grayscale secret image; (b) (f) five shadows SC1,SC2,SC3,SC4 and SC5; (g) (j) disclosed results by t shadows, where t=2,3,4 and 5, respectively.

    Based on the above results we conclude that:

    1. The shadows are noise-like, thus, every single shadow is secure.

    2. When any t<k1 shadows are inspected, there is no information on the secret image is leaked except for image size, which shows security of our method.

    3. When any t(k1tk2) shadows are collected, the secret image will be disclosed by our recovery method in a progressive way.

    4. When we collect any k2 or more shadows, the secret image is disclosed losslessly by our recovery method.

    5. (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS is achieved.

    Some available parameters of p,m1,m2,mn for different participant numbers are suggested in Table 1, some of which are applied to our experiments as well. The user can also search other parameters according to specific applications.

    Table 1.  Available parameters of p,m1,m2,mn.
    n p m1,m2,mn
    2 128 253,255
    2 131 253,254
    3 128 251,253,255
    3 131 253,254,255
    4 128 247,251,253,255
    4 131 251,253,254,255
    5 128 245,247,249,251,253
    5 131 247,251,253,254,255

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Herein, we compare the proposed scheme with other related schemes especially VSS [28] and polynomial-based scheme [12], since they are typical SIS schemes. Furthermore, VSS in [28] is progressive without codebook design and pixel expansion based on stacking recovery. Polynomial-based scheme in [12] is fully lossless.

    We note that, as stated in section 2.2, in general secret sharing is hard to be directly applied to SIS, thus, we omit the comparisons to ramp secret sharing.

    Figure 4 is one experimental result of our proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based SIS, where p=131,m1=251,m2=253,m3=254,m4=255, k1=2,k2=4,n=4 and its employed grayscale secret image is in Figure 4(a). Figures 4(b–e) are the generated 4 shadows, which are noise-like. Figures 4(f–h) display the disclosed grayscale secret image with any t(2t4) shadows by our recovery method. When more shadows are used, better disclosed secret image is obtained as well in [k1,k2], thus, the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS is progressive in [k1,k2]. The disclosed secret image with k2 shadows as Figure 4 (h) is the same as the original secret image Figure 4 (a), since Hh=1Ww=1|S(h,w)S(h,w)|=0 as well.

    Figure 4.  Simulation results of the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based PSIS, where k1=2,k2=4,n=4. (a) The grayscale secret image; (b) (e) four shadows SC1,SC2,SC3 and SC4; (f) (h) disclosed results by t shadows, where t=2,3 and 4, respectively.

    Figure 5 is further experimental result of our proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based SIS, where p=131,m1=251,m2=253,m3=254,m4=255, k1=2,k2=2,n=4 and its employed grayscale secret image is in Figure 5(a). Figures 5(b–e) are the generated 4 shadows, which are noise-like. Figures 5(f–h) display the disclosed grayscale secret image with any t(2t4) shadows by our recovery method. When two or more shadows are used, the secret image is losslessly disclosed so that our proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS reduces to (k,n) ramp SIS if k1=k2.

    Figure 5.  Simulation results of the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp CRT-based PSIS, where k1=2,k2=2,n=4. (a) The grayscale secret image; (b) (e) four shadows SC1,SC2,SC3 and SC4; (f) (h) disclosed results by t shadows, where t=2,3 and 4, respectively.

    Then Figure 6 illustrates one experimental result of VSS for (k,n) threshold in [28], where k=2,n=4 and its employed binary secret image is in Figure 6(a). Figures 6(b–e) are the generated 4 shadows, which are noise-like as well. Figures 6(f–h) display the disclosed grayscale secret image with any t(2t4) shadows by stacking recovery. When 2 or more shadows are used, better disclosed secret image is obtained as well in [k,n], thus, VSS for (k,n) threshold in [28] is progressive in [k,n].

    Figure 6.  Simulation results of VSS for (k,n) threshold [28], where k=2,n=4. (a) The binary secret image; (b) (e) four shadows SC1,SC2,SC3 and SC4; (f) (h) disclosed results by t shadows, where t=2,3 and 4, respectively.

    According to Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6, comparisons between VSS and our method are given as follows.

    1. Our method is for (k1,k2,n) ramp threshold due to random threshold selection in Step 3 of our method while VSS is only for (k,n) threshold, where (k,n) threshold is one special case of our method.

    2. Our disclosing method is modular arithmetic since CRT while VSS is stacking, thus, our disclosing method needs more computation than VSS.

    3. The secret image is disclosed in a progressive way by our method when t(k1tk2) shadows are collected due to random threshold selection in Step 3 of our method, while VSS is progressive in [k,n].

    4. Our method discloses the secret image losslessly when we collect any k2 or more shadows since Steps 4–5 of our method, while VSS is lossy.

    5. Our method is suitable for grayscale secret image as well as possible color secret image due to image characteristic analyses and CRT parameters design, while VSS is for binary secret image.

    Figure 7 is one experimental result of (k,n) threshold polynomial-based SIS [12], where k=2,n=4 and its employed grayscale secret image is in Figure 7(a). Figures 7(b–e) are the generated 4 shadows, which are noise-like. Figures 7(f–h) display the same disclosed grayscale secret images with high-resolution with any k=2 or more shadows by Lagrange interpolation.

    Figure 7.  Simulation results of (k,n) threshold polynomial-based SIS [12], where k=2,n=4. (a) The grayscale secret image; (b) (e) four shadows SC1,SC2,SC3 and SC4; (f) (h) disclosed results by t shadows, where t=2,3 and 4, respectively.

    According to Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 7, comparisons between our method and polynomial-based SIS are given as follows.

    1. Our method is for (k1,k2,n) ramp threshold due to random threshold selection in Step 3 of our method while polynomial-based SIS is only for (k,n) threshold, where (k,n) threshold is one special case of our method.

    2. Our disclosing method is modular arithmetic (O(k) operations [44]) since CRT while polynomial-based SIS is Lagrange interpolation (O(klog2k) operations [44]), thus, our disclosing method needs less computation than polynomial-based SIS.

    3. The secret image is disclosed in a progressive way by our method when any t(k1tk2) shadows are gained due to random threshold selection in Step 3 of our method, while polynomial-based SIS is "all-or-nothing".

    4. In some polynomial-based SIS schemes, it is generally lossy recovery since secret image is decoded by modular 251 which is less than max grayscale value 255. The recovering image will be lossy if the pixel value of the secret image exceeds 251 and some polynomial-based SIS schemes have a little bit of loss. By contrast, our method is lossless because of CRT. We further analyze this issue as follows. In polynomial-based SIS, the primes near 255 are 257 and 251. In most polynomial-based SIS, 251 is used. If 257 is used, we cannot store the i-th shadow pixel for the value of 256; otherwise 251 is used, we cannot disclose the value of the secret pixel greater than 250. Although some methods are given to solve the 251 problem, such as selecting the prime 257 [52], primitive polynomial for GF(28), splitting the secret pixel greater than 250 into two pixels and so on, they are achieved at some other costs. Taking [53] as one example, Huffman coding and image differencing process are employed to reduce the size of each shadow and to avoid auxiliary encryption. Primitive polynomial for GF(28) is adopted to avoid quality degradation. However, primitive polynomial for GF(28) has larger computational complexity.

    In addition, actually, when k1=k2=k, the (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS will be a (k,n)-SIS. Progressiveness is studied in some degree in VSS while that is seldom discussed in polynomial-based SIS. However, VSS is only suitable for binary image rather than grayscale image.

    In a word, based on image characteristics and CRT, the proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS has the features of (k1,k2,n) threshold with only modular arithmetic recovery method and no auxiliary encryption, which outperforms conventional (k,n) threshold SIS.

    For the above experiments, the quality evaluation metrics of the disclosed secret image are given in Table 2. According to Table 2, the proposed method achieves progressive characteristic in general (k1,k2,n) threshold when more shadows are collected, which outperforms conventional SIS as well.

    Table 2.  The quality evaluation of disclosed secret image.
    Schemes Metrics t=2 t=3 t=4 t=5
    Our (2,4,5) ramp SIS in Figure 1 PSNR 10.4435 13.5181 + +
    Our (2,4,5) ramp SIS in Figure 1 SSIM 0.0545 0.1500 1 1
    Our (2,4,5) ramp SIS in Figure 1 UQI 0.0566 0.1609 1 1
    Our (2,4,5) ramp SIS in Figure 1 NC 0.9351 0.9679 1 1
    Our (3,5,5) ramp SIS in Figure 3 PSNR - 10.2597 13.2965 +
    Our (3,5,5) ramp SIS in Figure 3 SSIM - 0.1224 0.3198 1
    Our (3,5,5) ramp SIS in Figure 1 UQI - 0.1204 0.3234 1
    Our (3,5,5) ramp SIS in Figure 1 NC - 0.9133 0.9577 1
    Our (2,4,4) ramp SIS in Figure 4 PSNR 10.2811 13.2348 + -
    Our (2,4,4) ramp SIS in Figure 4 SSIM 0.0528 0.1403 1 -
    Our (2,4,4) ramp SIS in Figure 1 UQI 0.0544 0.1511 1 -
    Our (2,4,4) ramp SIS in Figure 1 NC 0.9482 0.9745 1 -
    Our (2,2,4) ramp SIS in Figure 5 PSNR + + +
    Our (2,2,4) ramp SIS in Figure 5 SSIM 1 1 1 -
    Our (2,2,4) ramp SIS in Figure 1 UQI 1 1 1 -
    Our (2,2,4) ramp SIS in Figure 1 NC 1 1 1 -
    (2,4) threshold RGVSS in Figure 6 α 0.2886 0.5018 0.5018 -
    Polynomial-based (2,4) threshold SIS in Figure 7 PSNR + + + -
    Polynomial-based (2,4) threshold SIS in Figure 7 SSIM 1 1 1 -
    Polynomial-based (2,4) threshold SIS in Figure 7 UQI 1 1 1 -
    Polynomial-based (2,4) threshold SIS in Figure 7 NC 1 1 1 -

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In this paper, based on the study of image characteristics, the Chinese remainder theorem (CRT) and secret image sharing (SIS), we proposed (k1,k2,n) ramp SIS. Our method realizes (k1,k2,n) threshold and lossless recovery for grayscale image without auxiliary encryption. When we collect any k1 or more shadows, the secret image will be disclosed in a progressive way. On the other hand, when we collect any k2 or more shadows, the secret image will be disclosed losslessly. Furthermore, the disclosing method is only modular arithmetic resulting in ability in real-time application. Theoretical analyses and experiments are performed to display the effectiveness of our method. Applying our method to other SIS schemes like polynomial-based SIS and comparing to related ramp secret sharing will be our future work.

    The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Numbers: 61602491, 61501148) and the Key Program of the National University of Defense Technology (Grant Number: ZK-17-02-07).

    We have no conflicts of interest to declare.

    [1] Kimbrell DA, Beutler B (2001) The evolution and genetics of innate immunity. Nat Rev Genet 2: 256-267. doi: 10.1038/35066006
    [2] Takeuchi O, Akira S (2010) Pattern recognition receptors and inflammation. Cell 140: 805-820. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.01.022
    [3] Kawai T, Akira S (2010) The role of pattern-recognition receptors in innate immunity: update on Toll-like receptors. Nat Immunol 11: 373-384. doi: 10.1038/ni.1863
    [4] O'Neill LA, Golenbock D, Bowie AG (2013) The history of Toll-like receptors - redefining innate immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 13: 453-460. doi: 10.1038/nri3446
    [5] Clarke TB (2014) Microbial programming of systemic innate immunity and resistance to infection. PLoS Pathog 10: e1004506. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1004506
    [6] Drevets DA, Schawang JE, Dillon MJ, et al. (2008) Innate responses to systemic infection by intracellular bacteria trigger recruitment of Ly-6Chigh monocytes to the brain. J Immunol 181: 529-536. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.181.1.529
    [7] Blach-Olszewska Z, Leszek J (2007) Mechanisms of over-activated innate immune system regulation in autoimmune and neurodegenerative disorders. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 3: 365-372.
    [8] Bachmann MF, Kopf M (2001) On the role of the innate immunity in autoimmune disease. J Exp Med 193: F47-50. doi: 10.1084/jem.193.12.F47
    [9] Alvarez-Errico D, Vento-Tormo R, Sieweke M, et al. (2015) Epigenetic control of myeloid cell differentiation, identity and function. Nat Rev Immunol 15: 7-17.
    [10] Waddington CH (2012) The epigenotype. 1942. Int J Epidemiol 41: 10-13.
    [11] Saeed S, Quintin J, Kerstens HH, et al. (2014) Epigenetic programming of monocyte-to-macrophage differentiation and trained innate immunity. Science 345: 1251086. doi: 10.1126/science.1251086
    [12] Novakovic B, Habibi E, Wang SY, et al. (2016) beta-Glucan Reverses the Epigenetic State of LPS-Induced Immunological Tolerance. Cell 167: 1354-1368. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.034
    [13] NE II, Heward JA, Roux B, et al. (2014) Long non-coding RNAs and enhancer RNAs regulate the lipopolysaccharide-induced inflammatory response in human monocytes. Nat Commun 5: 3979.
    [14] Logie C, Stunnenberg HG (2016) Epigenetic memory: A macrophage perspective. Semin Immunol 28: 359-367. doi: 10.1016/j.smim.2016.06.003
    [15] O'Sullivan TE, Sun JC, Lanier LL (2015) Natural Killer Cell Memory. Immunity 43: 634-645. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2015.09.013
    [16] Netea MG, Quintin J, van der Meer JW (2011) Trained immunity: a memory for innate host defense. Cell Host Microbe 9: 355-361. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2011.04.006
    [17] Quintin J, Cheng SC, van der Meer JW, et al. (2014) Innate immune memory: towards a better understanding of host defense mechanisms. Curr Opin Immunol 29: 1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2014.02.006
    [18] Netea MG, Joosten LA, Latz E, et al. (2016) Trained immunity: A program of innate immune memory in health and disease. Science 352: aaf1098. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf1098
    [19] Suzuki MM, Bird A (2008) DNA methylation landscapes: provocative insights from epigenomics. Nat Rev Genet 9: 465-476.
    [20] Greer EL, Shi Y (2012) Histone methylation: a dynamic mark in health, disease and inheritance. Nat Rev Genet 13: 343-357.
    [21] Fang TC, Schaefer U, Mecklenbrauker I, et al. (2012) Histone H3 lysine 9 di-methylation as an epigenetic signature of the interferon response. J Exp Med 209: 661-669. doi: 10.1084/jem.20112343
    [22] Martinez P, Denys A, Delos M, et al. (2015) Macrophage polarization alters the expression and sulfation pattern of glycosaminoglycans. Glycobiology 25: 502-513. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwu137
    [23] Loke P, Nair MG, Parkinson J, et al. (2002) IL-4 dependent alternatively-activated macrophages have a distinctive in vivo gene expression phenotype. BMC Immunol 3: 7. doi: 10.1186/1471-2172-3-7
    [24] Jenkins SJ, Ruckerl D, Thomas GD, et al. (2013) IL-4 directly signals tissue-resident macrophages to proliferate beyond homeostatic levels controlled by CSF-1. J Exp Med 210: 2477-2491. doi: 10.1084/jem.20121999
    [25] Cabanel M, Brand C, Oliveira-Nunes MC, et al. (2015) Epigenetic Control of Macrophage Shape Transition towards an Atypical Elongated Phenotype by Histone Deacetylase Activity. PLoS One 10: e0132984. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132984
    [26] Yang X, Wang X, Liu D, et al. (2014) Epigenetic regulation of macrophage polarization by DNA methyltransferase 3b. Mol Endocrinol 28: 565-574. doi: 10.1210/me.2013-1293
    [27] Ramirez-Carrozzi VR, Nazarian AA, Li CC, et al. (2006) Selective and antagonistic functions of SWI/SNF and Mi-2beta nucleosome remodeling complexes during an inflammatory response. Genes Dev 20: 282-296. doi: 10.1101/gad.1383206
    [28] Ramirez-Carrozzi VR, Braas D, Bhatt DM, et al. (2009) A unifying model for the selective regulation of inducible transcription by CpG islands and nucleosome remodeling. Cell 138: 114-128. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2009.04.020
    [29] Satoh T, Takeuchi O, Vandenbon A, et al. (2010) The Jmjd3-Irf4 axis regulates M2 macrophage polarization and host responses against helminth infection. Nat Immunol 11: 936-944. doi: 10.1038/ni.1920
    [30] Stender JD, Glass CK (2013) Epigenomic control of the innate immune response. Curr Opin Pharmacol 13: 582-587. doi: 10.1016/j.coph.2013.06.002
    [31] Blackwood EM, Kadonaga JT (1998) Going the distance: a current view of enhancer action. Science 281: 60-63.
    [32] Kaikkonen MU, Spann NJ, Heinz S, et al. (2013) Remodeling of the enhancer landscape during macrophage activation is coupled to enhancer transcription. Mol Cell 51: 310-325. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.07.010
    [33] Pott S, Lieb JD (2015) What are super-enhancers? Nat Genet 47: 8-12.
    [34] Brown JD, Lin CY, Duan Q, et al. (2014) NF-kappaB directs dynamic super enhancer formation in inflammation and atherogenesis. Mol Cell 56: 219-231. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.08.024
    [35] Price AE, Liang HE, Sullivan BM, et al. (2010) Systemically dispersed innate IL-13-expressing cells in type 2 immunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107: 11489-11494. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1003988107
    [36] Monticelli LA, Sonnenberg GF, Abt MC, et al. (2011) Innate lymphoid cells promote lung-tissue homeostasis after infection with influenza virus. Nat Immunol 12: 1045-1054. doi: 10.1038/ni.2131
    [37] Fuchs A, Vermi W, Lee JS, et al. (2013) Intraepithelial type 1 innate lymphoid cells are a unique subset of IL-12- and IL-15-responsive IFN-gamma-producing cells. Immunity 38: 769-781. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2013.02.010
    [38] Cella M, Fuchs A, Vermi W, et al. (2009) A human natural killer cell subset provides an innate source of IL-22 for mucosal immunity. Nature 457: 722-725. doi: 10.1038/nature07537
    [39] Buonocore S, Ahern PP, Uhlig HH, et al. (2010) Innate lymphoid cells drive interleukin-23-dependent innate intestinal pathology. Nature 464: 1371-1375. doi: 10.1038/nature08949
    [40] Goto Y, Ivanov, II (2013) Intestinal epithelial cells as mediators of the commensal-host immune crosstalk. Immunol Cell Biol 91: 204-214. doi: 10.1038/icb.2012.80
    [41] Salzman NH, Underwood MA, Bevins CL (2007) Paneth cells, defensins, and the commensal microbiota: a hypothesis on intimate interplay at the intestinal mucosa. Semin Immunol 19: 70-83. doi: 10.1016/j.smim.2007.04.002
    [42] Fischer N, Sechet E, Friedman R, et al. (2016) Histone deacetylase inhibition enhances antimicrobial peptide but not inflammatory cytokine expression upon bacterial challenge. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113: E2993-3001. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1605997113
    [43] Chookajorn T, Dzikowski R, Frank M, et al. (2007) Epigenetic memory at malaria virulence genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104: 899-902. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0609084103
    [44] Huguenin M, Bracha R, Chookajorn T, et al. (2010) Epigenetic transcriptional gene silencing in Entamoeba histolytica: insight into histone and chromatin modifications. Parasitology 137: 619-627. doi: 10.1017/S0031182009991363
    [45] Marazzi I, Ho JS, Kim J, et al. (2012) Suppression of the antiviral response by an influenza histone mimic. Nature 483: 428-433. doi: 10.1038/nature10892
    [46] Pennini ME, Pai RK, Schultz DC, et al. (2006) Mycobacterium tuberculosis 19-kDa lipoprotein inhibits IFN-gamma-induced chromatin remodeling of MHC2TA by TLR2 and MAPK signaling. J Immunol 176: 4323-4330. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.7.4323
    [47] Lebreton A, Job V, Ragon M, et al. (2014) Structural basis for the inhibition of the chromatin repressor BAHD1 by the bacterial nucleomodulin LntA. MBio 5: e00775-00713.
    [48] Eskandarian HA, Impens F, Nahori MA, et al. (2013) A role for SIRT2-dependent histone H3K18 deacetylation in bacterial infection. Science 341: 1238858. doi: 10.1126/science.1238858
    [49] Arbibe L, Kim DW, Batsche E, et al. (2007) An injected bacterial effector targets chromatin access for transcription factor NF-kappaB to alter transcription of host genes involved in immune responses. Nat Immunol 8: 47-56. doi: 10.1038/ni1423
    [50] Harouz H, Rachez C, Meijer BM, et al. (2014) Shigella flexneri targets the HP1gamma subcode through the phosphothreonine lyase OspF. EMBO J 33: 2606-2622. doi: 10.15252/embj.201489244
    [51] Li H, Xu H, Zhou Y, et al. (2007) The phosphothreonine lyase activity of a bacterial type III effector family. Science 315: 1000-1003. doi: 10.1126/science.1138960
    [52] Foster SL, Hargreaves DC, Medzhitov R (2007) Gene-specific control of inflammation by TLR-induced chromatin modifications. Nature 447: 972-978.
    [53] El Gazzar M, Liu T, Yoza BK, et al. (2010) Dynamic and selective nucleosome repositioning during endotoxin tolerance. J Biol Chem 285: 1259-1271. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M109.067330
    [54] Shalova IN, Lim JY, Chittezhath M, et al. (2015) Human monocytes undergo functional re-programming during sepsis mediated by hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha. Immunity 42: 484-498. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2015.02.001
    [55] Cheng SC, Scicluna BP, Arts RJ, et al. (2016) Broad defects in the energy metabolism of leukocytes underlie immunoparalysis in sepsis. Nat Immunol 17: 406-413. doi: 10.1038/ni.3398
    [56] Chen J, Ivashkiv LB (2010) IFN-gamma abrogates endotoxin tolerance by facilitating Toll-like receptor-induced chromatin remodeling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107: 19438-19443. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1007816107
    [57] Tribouley J, Tribouley-Duret J, Appriou M (1978) [Effect of Bacillus Callmette Guerin (BCG) on the receptivity of nude mice to Schistosoma mansoni]. C R Seances Soc Biol Fil 172: 902-904.
    [58] Kleinnijenhuis J, Quintin J, Preijers F, et al. (2014) Long-lasting effects of BCG vaccination on both heterologous Th1/Th17 responses and innate trained immunity. J Innate Immun 6: 152-158. doi: 10.1159/000355628
    [59] van 't Wout JW, Poell R, van Furth R (1992) The role of BCG/PPD-activated macrophages in resistance against systemic candidiasis in mice. Scand J Immunol 36: 713-719. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.1992.tb03132.x
    [60] Kleinnijenhuis J, Quintin J, Preijers F, et al. (2012) Bacille Calmette-Guerin induces NOD2-dependent nonspecific protection from reinfection via epigenetic reprogramming of monocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 17537-17542. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1202870109
    [61] Quintin J, Saeed S, Martens JH, et al. (2012) Candida albicans infection affords protection against reinfection via functional reprogramming of monocytes. Cell Host Microbe 12: 223-232. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.006
    [62] Ostuni R, Piccolo V, Barozzi I, et al. (2013) Latent enhancers activated by stimulation in differentiated cells. Cell 152: 157-171. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.12.018
    [63] Bezman NA, Kim CC, Sun JC, et al. (2012) Molecular definition of the identity and activation of natural killer cells. Nat Immunol 13: 1000-1009. doi: 10.1038/ni.2395
    [64] Schlums H, Cichocki F, Tesi B, et al. (2015) Cytomegalovirus infection drives adaptive epigenetic diversification of NK cells with altered signaling and effector function. Immunity 42: 443-456. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2015.02.008
    [65] Kagi D, Ledermann B, Burki K, et al. (1994) Cytotoxicity mediated by T cells and natural killer cells is greatly impaired in perforin-deficient mice. Nature 369: 31-37. doi: 10.1038/369031a0
    [66] Ferlazzo G, Tsang ML, Moretta L, et al. (2002) Human dendritic cells activate resting natural killer (NK) cells and are recognized via the NKp30 receptor by activated NK cells. J Exp Med 195: 343-351. doi: 10.1084/jem.20011149
    [67] Xu HC, Grusdat M, Pandyra AA, et al. (2014) Type I interferon protects antiviral CD8+ T cells from NK cell cytotoxicity. Immunity 40: 949-960. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.05.004
    [68] Bouchon A, Cella M, Grierson HL, et al. (2001) Activation of NK cell-mediated cytotoxicity by a SAP-independent receptor of the CD2 family. J Immunol 167: 5517-5521. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.167.10.5517
    [69] Kruse PH, Matta J, Ugolini S, et al. (2014) Natural cytotoxicity receptors and their ligands. Immunol Cell Biol 92: 221-229. doi: 10.1038/icb.2013.98
    [70] Uhrberg M, Valiante NM, Shum BP, et al. (1997) Human diversity in killer cell inhibitory receptor genes. Immunity 7: 753-763. doi: 10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80394-5
    [71] O'Leary JG, Goodarzi M, Drayton DL, et al. (2006) T cell- and B cell-independent adaptive immunity mediated by natural killer cells. Nat Immunol 7: 507-516. doi: 10.1038/ni1332
    [72] Sun JC, Beilke JN, Lanier LL (2009) Adaptive immune features of natural killer cells. Nature 457: 557-561. doi: 10.1038/nature07665
    [73] Min-Oo G, Lanier LL (2014) Cytomegalovirus generates long-lived antigen-specific NK cells with diminished bystander activation to heterologous infection. J Exp Med 211: 2669-2680. doi: 10.1084/jem.20141172
    [74] Lee J, Zhang T, Hwang I, et al. (2015) Epigenetic modification and antibody-dependent expansion of memory-like NK cells in human cytomegalovirus-infected individuals. Immunity 42: 431-442. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2015.02.013
    [75] Calore F, Lovat F, Garofalo M (2013) Non-coding RNAs and cancer. Int J Mol Sci 14: 17085-17110. doi: 10.3390/ijms140817085
    [76] Nagano T, Fraser P (2011) No-nonsense functions for long noncoding RNAs. Cell 145: 178-181. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.03.014
    [77] Da Sacco L, Baldassarre A, Masotti A (2012) Bioinformatics tools and novel challenges in long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) functional analysis. Int J Mol Sci 13: 97-114.
    [78] Wilusz JE, Sunwoo H, Spector DL (2009) Long noncoding RNAs: functional surprises from the RNA world. Genes Dev 23: 1494-1504. doi: 10.1101/gad.1800909
    [79] Kaikkonen MU, Lam MT, Glass CK (2011) Non-coding RNAs as regulators of gene expression and epigenetics. Cardiovasc Res 90: 430-440. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvr097
    [80] Wang KC, Chang HY (2011) Molecular mechanisms of long noncoding RNAs. Mol Cell 43: 904-914. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2011.08.018
    [81] Ng KW, Anderson C, Marshall EA, et al. (2016) Piwi-interacting RNAs in cancer: emerging functions and clinical utility. Mol Cancer 15: 5. doi: 10.1186/s12943-016-0491-9
    [82] Bartel DP (2004) MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell 116: 281-297. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00045-5
    [83] Doench JG, Sharp PA (2004) Specificity of microRNA target selection in translational repression. Genes Dev 18: 504-511. doi: 10.1101/gad.1184404
    [84] Grimson A, Farh KK, Johnston WK, et al. (2007) MicroRNA targeting specificity in mammals: determinants beyond seed pairing. Mol Cell 27: 91-105. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.06.017
    [85] Kim VN, Han J, Siomi MC (2009) Biogenesis of small RNAs in animals. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10: 126-139.
    [86] Lee RC, Feinbaum RL, Ambros V (1993) The C. elegans heterochronic gene lin-4 encodes small RNAs with antisense complementarity to lin-14. Cell 75: 843-854.
    [87] Wightman B, Ha I, Ruvkun G (1993) Posttranscriptional regulation of the heterochronic gene lin-14 by lin-4 mediates temporal pattern formation in C. elegans. Cell 75: 855-862. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90530-4
    [88] Paladini L, Fabris L, Bottai G, et al. (2016) Targeting microRNAs as key modulators of tumor immune response. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 35: 103. doi: 10.1186/s13046-016-0375-2
    [89] Taganov KD, Boldin MP, Chang KJ, et al. (2006) NF-kappaB-dependent induction of microRNA miR-146, an inhibitor targeted to signaling proteins of innate immune responses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103: 12481-12486. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0605298103
    [90] O'Neill LA, Sheedy FJ, McCoy CE (2011) MicroRNAs: the fine-tuners of Toll-like receptor signalling. Nat Rev Immunol 11: 163-175. doi: 10.1038/nri2957
    [91] Pathak S, Grillo AR, Scarpa M, et al. (2015) MiR-155 modulates the inflammatory phenotype of intestinal myofibroblasts by targeting SOCS1 in ulcerative colitis. Exp Mol Med 47: e164. doi: 10.1038/emm.2015.21
    [92] Bazzoni F, Rossato M, Fabbri M, et al. (2009) Induction and regulatory function of miR-9 in human monocytes and neutrophils exposed to proinflammatory signals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 5282-5287. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0810909106
    [93] Androulidaki A, Iliopoulos D, Arranz A, et al. (2009) The kinase Akt1 controls macrophage response to lipopolysaccharide by regulating microRNAs. Immunity 31: 220-231. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2009.06.024
    [94] Curtale G, Mirolo M, Renzi TA, et al. (2013) Negative regulation of Toll-like receptor 4 signaling by IL-10-dependent microRNA-146b. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110: 11499-11504. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1219852110
    [95] McCoy CE, Sheedy FJ, Qualls JE, et al. (2010) IL-10 inhibits miR-155 induction by toll-like receptors. J Biol Chem 285: 20492-20498. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.102111
    [96] Rossato M, Curtale G, Tamassia N, et al. (2012) IL-10-induced microRNA-187 negatively regulates TNF-alpha, IL-6, and IL-12p40 production in TLR4-stimulated monocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: E3101-3110. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1209100109
    [97] Sheedy FJ, Palsson-McDermott E, Hennessy EJ, et al. (2010) Negative regulation of TLR4 via targeting of the proinflammatory tumor suppressor PDCD4 by the microRNA miR-21. Nat Immunol 11: 141-147. doi: 10.1038/ni.1828
    [98] El Gazzar M, McCall CE (2010) MicroRNAs distinguish translational from transcriptional silencing during endotoxin tolerance. J Biol Chem 285: 20940-20951. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.115063
    [99] El Gazzar M, Church A, Liu T, et al. (2011) MicroRNA-146a regulates both transcription silencing and translation disruption of TNF-alpha during TLR4-induced gene reprogramming. J Leukoc Biol 90: 509-519. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0211074
    [100] Tili E, Michaille JJ, Cimino A, et al. (2007) Modulation of miR-155 and miR-125b levels following lipopolysaccharide/TNF-alpha stimulation and their possible roles in regulating the response to endotoxin shock. J Immunol 179: 5082-5089. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.179.8.5082
    [101] Renzi TA, Rubino M, Gornati L, et al. (2015) MiR-146b Mediates Endotoxin Tolerance in Human Phagocytes. Mediators Inflamm 2015: 145305.
    [102] Magistri M, Faghihi MA, St Laurent G, 3rd, et al. (2012) Regulation of chromatin structure by long noncoding RNAs: focus on natural antisense transcripts. Trends Genet 28: 389-396. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2012.03.013
    [103] Louro R, El-Jundi T, Nakaya HI, et al. (2008) Conserved tissue expression signatures of intronic noncoding RNAs transcribed from human and mouse loci. Genomics 92: 18-25. doi: 10.1016/j.ygeno.2008.03.013
    [104] Pandey RR, Mondal T, Mohammad F, et al. (2008) Kcnq1ot1 antisense noncoding RNA mediates lineage-specific transcriptional silencing through chromatin-level regulation. Mol Cell 32: 232-246. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.08.022
    [105] Wang X, Song X, Glass CK, et al. (2011) The long arm of long noncoding RNAs: roles as sensors regulating gene transcriptional programs. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 3: a003756.
    [106] Guttman M, Rinn JL (2012) Modular regulatory principles of large non-coding RNAs. Nature 482: 339-346. doi: 10.1038/nature10887
    [107] Kretz M, Siprashvili Z, Chu C, et al. (2013) Control of somatic tissue differentiation by the long non-coding RNA TINCR. Nature 493: 231-235.
    [108] Gong C, Maquat LE (2011) lncRNAs transactivate STAU1-mediated mRNA decay by duplexing with 3' UTRs via Alu elements. Nature 470: 284-288. doi: 10.1038/nature09701
    [109] Carpenter S, Aiello D, Atianand MK, et al. (2013) A long noncoding RNA mediates both activation and repression of immune response genes. Science 341: 789-792. doi: 10.1126/science.1240925
    [110] Rapicavoli NA, Qu K, Zhang J, et al. (2013) A mammalian pseudogene lncRNA at the interface of inflammation and anti-inflammatory therapeutics. Elife 2: e00762.
    [111] Li Z, Chao TC, Chang KY, et al. (2014) The long noncoding RNA THRIL regulates TNFalpha expression through its interaction with hnRNPL. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111: 1002-1007. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1313768111
    [112] Krawczyk M, Emerson BM (2014) p50-associated COX-2 extragenic RNA (PACER) activates COX-2 gene expression by occluding repressive NF-kappaB complexes. Elife 3: e01776.
    [113] Liu B, Sun L, Liu Q, et al. (2015) A cytoplasmic NF-kappaB interacting long noncoding RNA blocks IkappaB phosphorylation and suppresses breast cancer metastasis. Cancer Cell 27: 370-381. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2015.02.004
    [114] Murphy MB, Medvedev AE (2016) Long noncoding RNAs as regulators of Toll-like receptor signaling and innate immunity. J Leukoc Biol 99: 839-850. doi: 10.1189/jlb.2RU1215-575R
    [115] Li W, Notani D, Rosenfeld MG (2016) Enhancers as non-coding RNA transcription units: recent insights and future perspectives. Nat Rev Genet 17: 207-223. doi: 10.1038/nrg.2016.4
    [116] Hah N, Murakami S, Nagari A, et al. (2013) Enhancer transcripts mark active estrogen receptor binding sites. Genome Res 23: 1210-1223. doi: 10.1101/gr.152306.112
    [117] Melgar MF, Collins FS, Sethupathy P (2011) Discovery of active enhancers through bidirectional expression of short transcripts. Genome Biol 12: R113. doi: 10.1186/gb-2011-12-11-r113
    [118] Zhu Y, Sun L, Chen Z, et al. (2013) Predicting enhancer transcription and activity from chromatin modifications. Nucleic Acids Res 41: 10032-10043. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt826
    [119] Arner E, Daub CO, Vitting-Seerup K, et al. (2015) Transcribed enhancers lead waves of coordinated transcription in transitioning mammalian cells. Science 347: 1010-1014. doi: 10.1126/science.1259418
    [120] Hah N, Benner C, Chong LW, et al. (2015) Inflammation-sensitive super enhancers form domains of coordinately regulated enhancer RNAs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112: E297-302. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1424028112
    [121] Kim TK, Hemberg M, Gray JM, et al. (2010) Widespread transcription at neuronal activity-regulated enhancers. Nature 465: 182-187. doi: 10.1038/nature09033
    [122] Alexopoulou L, Holt AC, Medzhitov R, et al. (2001) Recognition of double-stranded RNA and activation of NF-kappaB by Toll-like receptor 3. Nature 413: 732-738. doi: 10.1038/35099560
    [123] Lee J, Sayed N, Hunter A, et al. (2012) Activation of innate immunity is required for efficient nuclear reprogramming. Cell 151: 547-558. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.09.034
    [124] Takahashi K, Tanabe K, Ohnuki M, et al. (2007) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131: 861-872. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.019
    [125] Takahashi K, Okita K, Nakagawa M, et al. (2007) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from fibroblast cultures. Nat Protoc 2: 3081-3089. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2007.418
    [126] Meng S, Zhou G, Gu Q, et al. (2016) Transdifferentiation Requires iNOS Activation: Role of RING1A S-Nitrosylation. Circ Res 119: e129-e138.
    [127] Buenrostro JD, Giresi PG, Zaba LC, et al. (2013) Transposition of native chromatin for fast and sensitive epigenomic profiling of open chromatin, DNA-binding proteins and nucleosome position. Nat Methods 10: 1213-1218. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2688
    [128] Mercer TR, Edwards SL, Clark MB, et al. (2013) DNase I-hypersensitive exons colocalize with promoters and distal regulatory elements. Nat Genet 45: 852-859. doi: 10.1038/ng.2677
    [129] Nagano T, Lubling Y, Yaffe E, et al. (2015) Single-cell Hi-C for genome-wide detection of chromatin interactions that occur simultaneously in a single cell. Nat Protoc 10: 1986-2003. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2015.127
    [130] Miyanari Y, Torres-Padilla ME (2012) Control of ground-state pluripotency by allelic regulation of Nanog. Nature 483: 470-473. doi: 10.1038/nature10807
    [131] Soucie EL, Weng Z, Geirsdottir L, et al. (2016) Lineage-specific enhancers activate self-renewal genes in macrophages and embryonic stem cells. Science 351: aad5510. doi: 10.1126/science.aad5510
    [132] Paul F, Arkin Y, Giladi A, et al. (2015) Transcriptional Heterogeneity and Lineage Commitment in Myeloid Progenitors. Cell 163: 1663-1677. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.11.013
    [133] Abraham BJ, Cui K, Tang Q, et al. (2013) Dynamic regulation of epigenomic landscapes during hematopoiesis. BMC Genomics 14: 193. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-14-193
    [134] Olsson A, Venkatasubramanian M, Chaudhri VK, et al. (2016) Single-cell analysis of mixed-lineage states leading to a binary cell fate choice. Nature 537: 698-702. doi: 10.1038/nature19348
    [135] Epelman S, Lavine KJ, Beaudin AE, et al. (2014) Embryonic and adult-derived resident cardiac macrophages are maintained through distinct mechanisms at steady state and during inflammation. Immunity 40: 91-104. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2013.11.019
    [136] Italiani P, Boraschi D (2014) From Monocytes to M1/M2 Macrophages: Phenotypical vs. Functional Differentiation. Front Immunol 5: 514.
    [137] Ganan-Gomez I, Wei Y, Starczynowski DT, et al. (2015) Deregulation of innate immune and inflammatory signaling in myelodysplastic syndromes. Leukemia 29: 1458-1469. doi: 10.1038/leu.2015.69
    [138] Lin CY, Loven J, Rahl PB, et al. (2012) Transcriptional amplification in tumor cells with elevated c-Myc. Cell 151: 56-67. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.08.026
    [139] Liu G, Gramling S, Munoz D, et al. (2011) Two novel BRM insertion promoter sequence variants are associated with loss of BRM expression and lung cancer risk. Oncogene 30: 3295-3304. doi: 10.1038/onc.2011.81
    [140] Kawauchi S, Calof AL, Santos R, et al. (2009) Multiple organ system defects and transcriptional dysregulation in the Nipbl(+/-) mouse, a model of Cornelia de Lange Syndrome. PLoS Genet 5: e1000650. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000650
    [141] Ballman KV (2015) Biomarker: Predictive or Prognostic? J Clin Oncol 33: 3968-3971. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.3651
    [142] Mehta S, Shelling A, Muthukaruppan A, et al. (2010) Predictive and prognostic molecular markers for cancer medicine. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2: 125-148. doi: 10.1177/1758834009360519
    [143] van Leeuwen MA, Westra J, Limburg PC, et al. (1995) Clinical significance of interleukin-6 measurement in early rheumatoid arthritis: relation with laboratory and clinical variables and radiological progression in a three year prospective study. Ann Rheum Dis 54: 674-677. doi: 10.1136/ard.54.8.674
    [144] Knudsen LS, Klarlund M, Skjodt H, et al. (2008) Biomarkers of inflammation in patients with unclassified polyarthritis and early rheumatoid arthritis. Relationship to disease activity and radiographic outcome. J Rheumatol 35: 1277-1287.
    [145] Klein-Wieringa IR, van der Linden MP, Knevel R, et al. (2011) Baseline serum adipokine levels predict radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 63: 2567-2574. doi: 10.1002/art.30449
    [146] Lard LR, Roep BO, Toes RE, et al. (2004) Enhanced concentrations of interleukin 16 are associated with joint destruction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 31: 35-39.
    [147] Syversen SW, Goll GL, Haavardsholm EA, et al. (2008) A high serum level of eotaxin (CCL 11) is associated with less radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Arthritis Res Ther 10: R28. doi: 10.1186/ar2381
    [148] Irizarry RA, Ladd-Acosta C, Wen B, et al. (2009) The human colon cancer methylome shows similar hypo- and hypermethylation at conserved tissue-specific CpG island shores. Nat Genet 41: 178-186. doi: 10.1038/ng.298
    [149] Laird PW (2003) The power and the promise of DNA methylation markers. Nat Rev Cancer 3: 253-266. doi: 10.1038/nrc1045
    [150] Luczak MW, Jagodzinski PP (2006) The role of DNA methylation in cancer development. Folia Histochem Cytobiol 44: 143-154.
    [151] Lu H, Liu X, Deng Y, et al. (2013) DNA methylation, a hand behind neurodegenerative diseases. Front Aging Neurosci 5: 85.
    [152] Richardson B, Scheinbart L, Strahler J, et al. (1990) Evidence for impaired T cell DNA methylation in systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 33: 1665-1673. doi: 10.1002/art.1780331109
    [153] Liu Y, Aryee MJ, Padyukov L, et al. (2013) Epigenome-wide association data implicate DNA methylation as an intermediary of genetic risk in rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Biotechnol 31: 142-147. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2487
    [154] Lin SY, Hsieh SC, Lin YC, et al. (2012) A whole genome methylation analysis of systemic lupus erythematosus: hypomethylation of the IL10 and IL1R2 promoters is associated with disease activity. Genes Immun 13: 214-220. doi: 10.1038/gene.2011.74
    [155] Yeung KS, Chung BH, Choufani S, et al. (2017) Genome-Wide DNA Methylation Analysis of Chinese Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Identified Hypomethylation in Genes Related to the Type I Interferon Pathway. PLoS One 12: e0169553. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169553
    [156] Hashimoto Y, Zumwalt TJ, Goel A (2016) DNA methylation patterns as noninvasive biomarkers and targets of epigenetic therapies in colorectal cancer. Epigenomics 8: 685-703. doi: 10.2217/epi-2015-0013
    [157] Uhl B, Gevensleben H, Tolkach Y, et al. (2017) PITX2 DNA Methylation as Biomarker for Individualized Risk Assessment of Prostate Cancer in Core Biopsies. J Mol Diagn 19: 107-114. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2016.08.008
    [158] Lofton-Day C, Model F, Devos T, et al. (2008) DNA methylation biomarkers for blood-based colorectal cancer screening. Clin Chem 54: 414-423. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2007.095992
    [159] Yang M, Park JY (2012) DNA methylation in promoter region as biomarkers in prostate cancer. Methods Mol Biol 863: 67-109. doi: 10.1007/978-1-61779-612-8_5
    [160] Chung W, Kwabi-Addo B, Ittmann M, et al. (2008) Identification of novel tumor markers in prostate, colon and breast cancer by unbiased methylation profiling. PLoS One 3: e2079. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002079
    [161] Jiao Y, Shi C, Edil BH, et al. (2011) DAXX/ATRX, MEN1, and mTOR pathway genes are frequently altered in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Science 331: 1199-1203. doi: 10.1126/science.1200609
    [162] Dalgliesh GL, Furge K, Greenman C, et al. (2010) Systematic sequencing of renal carcinoma reveals inactivation of histone modifying genes. Nature 463: 360-363. doi: 10.1038/nature08672
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Atieh Mokhtari, Mohammad Taheri, 2024, Ramp Progressive Secret Image Sharing Using Ensemble of Simple Methods, 979-8-3315-1127-2, 417, 10.1109/ICCKE65377.2024.10874825
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(8020) PDF downloads(1577) Cited by(2)

Figures and Tables

Figures(4)  /  Tables(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog