Skip to content

Changes in DNA Methylation Associated With Psychobehavioral Interventions: A Scoping Literature Review.

Karen L Saban, Linda Janusek, Paula de la Pena, Sueyeon Lee, Dina Tell, Herbert L Mathews, Alexandra L Nowak, Alexandria Nyembwe, Jacquelyn Y Taylor

Biological Research for Nursing May 31, 2025 DOI: 10.1177/10998004251346179 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Scoping review Peer reviewed
Sample size 21
Population Adult humans
Interventions mindfulness-based stress reduction cognitive behavioral therapy yoga
Keywords Dna methylation Epigenetics Stress reduction Mind-body interventions
Citations 3
Key findings Several studies reported differences in DNA methylation in response to psychobehavioral interventions across genes related to stress and inflammation, but many were inadequately powered and varied widely in methods.

Abstract

Background: DNA methylation (DNAm) is an epigenetic process of addition or reduction of methyl groups to genes that modify gene expression and can alter the physiological response to psychological stress. DNAm associated with psychological stress is malleable, making it a prime target for psychobehavioral interventions. Research is beginning to examine changes in DNAm in response to psychobehavioral interventions, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction, cognitive behavioral therapy, and yoga. A better understanding of the current evidence may provide direction for future research.

Objective: The purpose of this scoping review is to summarize current studies, identify knowledge gaps, and make recommendations for further research related to examining alterations in DNAm in response to psychobehavioral interventions.

Methods: A scoping review was conducted based on the methods recommended by Arksey and O'Malley (2005). Studies examining response of blood or saliva DNAm to psychobehavioral interventions in adult humans were reviewed.

Results: Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Although many studies were inadequately powered, several reported differences in DNAm in response to a psychobehavioral intervention across a variety of genes, including genes related to stress and inflammation. However, the studies varied with respect to participant health status, type and duration of psychobehavioral interventions evaluated, biospecimens examined, and method of DNA analysis.

Conclusions: The evaluation of DNAm in response to psychobehavioral interventions is a growing area of research. Future research is needed to address design limitations of existing investigations, evaluate the biological importance of observations, and link the DNAm response to physiological and psychological outcomes of the interventions.