Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24920305›Full record

ArticleBMC medical genomics2014

On the identification of potential regulatory variants within genome wide association candidate SNP sets.

Chih-Yu Chen, I-Shou Chang, Chao A Hsiung, Wyeth W Wasserman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical genomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Using GWAS to identify novel therapeutic targets for osteoporosis.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2017
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Genetics of Common Endocrine Disease: The Present and the Future.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2016
    Review
  19. Role of non-coding sequence variants in cancer.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2016
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chih-Yu Chen
I-Shou Chang
Chao A Hsiung
Wyeth W WassermanCentre for Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics, Child and Family Research Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. wyeth@cmmt.ubc.ca.
National Health Research Institutes · TWUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

Computational Resources for the Compilation and Distribution of Transcription FacR01GM084875 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA · PI WASSERMAN, WYETH W · 2010 to 2012
$1.0M
CIHR MOP82875NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084875NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM084875
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenome wide association studies (GWAS) are a population-scale approach to the identification of segments of the genome in which genetic variations may contribute to disease risk. Current methods focus on the discovery of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with disease traits. As there are many SNPs within identified risk loci, and the majority of these are situated within non-coding regions, a key challenge is to identify and prioritize variants affecting regulatory sequences that are likely to contribute to the phenotype assessed.

methodsWe focused investigation on SNPs within lung and breast cancer GWAS loci that reached genome-wide significance for potential roles in gene regulation with a specific focus on SNPs likely to disrupt transcription factor binding sites. Within risk loci, the regulatory potential of sub-regions was classified using relevant open chromatin and epigenetic high throughput sequencing data sets from the ENCODE project in available cancer and normal cell lines. Furthermore, transcription factor affinity altering variants were predicted by comparison of position weight matrix scores between disease and reference alleles. Lastly, ChIP-seq data of transcription associated factors and topological domains were included as binding evidence and potential gene target inference.

resultsThe sets of SNPs, including both the disease-associated markers and those in high linkage disequilibrium with them, were significantly over-represented in regulatory sequences of cancer and/or normal cells; however, over-representation was generally not restricted to disease-relevant tissue specific regions. The calculated regulatory potential, allelic binding affinity scores and ChIP-seq binding evidence were the three criteria used to prioritize candidates. Fitting all three criteria, we highlighted breast cancer susceptibility SNPs and a borderline lung cancer relevant SNP located in cancer-specific enhancers overlapping multiple distinct transcription associated factor ChIP-seq binding sites.

conclusionIncorporating high throughput sequencing epigenetic and transcription factor data sets from both cancer and normal cells into cancer genetic studies reveals potential functional SNPs and informs subsequent characterization efforts.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyAllelesCell Line, TumorChromatinChromatin ImmunoprecipitationDNA, IntergenicEnhancer Elements, GeneticGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenome, HumanHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMolecular Sequence AnnotationNeoplasmsPolymorphism, Single NucleotidePosition-Specific Scoring MatricesProtein BindingChromatinDNA, IntergenicTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID24920305
PMCPMC4066296
OpenAlexW2014255047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.