Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25616342›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2015

Predicting genome-wide DNA methylation using methylation marks, genomic position, and DNA regulatory elements.

Weiwei Zhang, Tim D Spector, Panos Deloukas, Jordana T Bell, Barbara E Engelhardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

116 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. slideimp: efficient imputation of DNA methylation data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Epigenetic Landscapes of Pain: DNA Methylation Dynamics in Chronic Pain.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Weiwei ZhangDepartment of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. wz31@duke.edu.
Tim D SpectorDepartment of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, London, UK. tim.spector@kcl.ac.uk.
Panos DeloukasWilliam Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. p.deloukas@qmul.ac.uk.
Jordana T BellDepartment of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, London, UK. jordana.bell@kcl.ac.uk.
Barbara E EngelhardtDepartment of Computer Science, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA. bee@princeton.edu.

Funding

Statistical models to investigate long-distance QTL transcription regulationR00HG006265 · NHGRI · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI ENGELHARDT, BARBARA · 2012 to 2014
$747k
NHGRI NIH HHS R00 HG006265
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent assays for individual-specific genome-wide DNA methylation profiles have enabled epigenome-wide association studies to identify specific CpG sites associated with a phenotype. Computational prediction of CpG site-specific methylation levels is critical to enable genome-wide analyses, but current approaches tackle average methylation within a locus and are often limited to specific genomic regions.

resultsWe characterize genome-wide DNA methylation patterns, and show that correlation among CpG sites decays rapidly, making predictions solely based on neighboring sites challenging. We built a random forest classifier to predict methylation levels at CpG site resolution using features including neighboring CpG site methylation levels and genomic distance, co-localization with coding regions, CpG islands (CGIs), and regulatory elements from the ENCODE project. Our approach achieves 92% prediction accuracy of genome-wide methylation levels at single-CpG-site precision. The accuracy increases to 98% when restricted to CpG sites within CGIs and is robust across platform and cell-type heterogeneity. Our classifier outperforms other types of classifiers and identifies features that contribute to prediction accuracy: neighboring CpG site methylation, CGIs, co-localized DNase I hypersensitive sites, transcription factor binding sites, and histone modifications were found to be most predictive of methylation levels.

conclusionsOur observations of DNA methylation patterns led us to develop a classifier to predict DNA methylation levels at CpG site resolution with high accuracy. Furthermore, our method identified genomic features that interact with DNA methylation, suggesting mechanisms involved in DNA methylation modification and regulation, and linking diverse epigenetic processes.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanAdultAgedAlgorithmsCpG IslandsDNA MethylationFemaleGenomicsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrincipal Component AnalysisRegulatory Sequences, Nucleic AcidSequence Analysis, DNASulfiteshydrogen sulfiteSulfites

Identifiers

PMID25616342
PMCPMC4389802

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.