Usage Information
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2025;10(3):e186096. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.186096.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE) around conception in preclinical models results in placental insufficiency, likely contributing to offspring abnormalities. Altered placental DNA methylation (DNAm) and gene expression suggest epigenetic mechanisms, perhaps involving impacts on methyl donor levels. PAE around conception in women is common but placental effects are rarely examined. This cohort study investigated associations between PAE around conception and intake/plasma measures of the methyl donors folate and choline, feto-placental blood flow, and placental growth measures, gene expression, and DNAm.METHODS Pregnant participants delivered at Mater Mothers’ Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia (n = 411). Dietary intake of choline and folate were calculated and plasma concentrations measured using mass spectrometry (MS) and clinical immunoanalyzer, respectively. Cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) was calculated using Doppler measurements. Placentas were weighed/measured at delivery and samples used to quantify methyl donors (MS), global DNAm (ELISA), and gene expression (quantitative PCR). Data were compared between control/abstinent and PAE groups, by fetal sex.RESULTS A CPR <5th-centile, indicating fetal brain sparing because of placental insufficiency, was found in 2% of controls and 18% of the PAE group, mostly male fetuses (63%). Compared with controls, male PAE placentas had reduced mean thickness and placental growth factor mRNA and DNAm, whereas female PAE placentas had increased S-adenosylmethionine and a trend toward increased DNAm.CONCLUSION PAE around conception is associated with reduced CPR and altered placental growth measures, particularly in males, with potential implications for future health.FUNDING National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1191217) and Mary McConnel Career Boost Program for Women in Paediatric Research (WIS132020).
Authors
Sarah E. Steane, Christopher Edwards, Erika Cavanagh, Chelsea Vanderpeet, Jade M. Kubler, Lisa K. Akison, James S.M. Cuffe, Linda A. Gallo, Karen M. Moritz, Vicki L. Clifton
Usage data is cumulative from February 2025 through November 2025.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 2,116 | 207 |
| 433 | 64 | |
| Figure | 377 | 6 |
| Table | 241 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 260 | 3 |
| Citation downloads | 72 | 0 |
| Totals | 3,499 | 280 |
| Total Views | 3,779 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
