Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30571772›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Critical evaluation of linear regression models for cell-subtype specific methylation signal from mixed blood cell DNA.

Daniel W Kennedy, Nicole M White, Miles C Benton, Andrew Fox, Rodney J Scott, Lyn R Griffiths, Kerrie Mengersen, Rodney A Lea

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

8 authors.

Daniel W KennedyARC Centre of Excellence for the Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Nicole M WhiteARC Centre of Excellence for the Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Miles C BentonGenomics Research Centre, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Andrew FoxFlorey Department of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Rodney J ScottCentre for Information-Based Medicine, Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia.
Lyn R GriffithsGenomics Research Centre, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6774-5475
Kerrie MengersenARC Centre of Excellence for the Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Rodney A LeaGenomics Research Centre, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0034-3279

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epigenome-wide association studies seek to identify DNA methylation sites associated with clinical outcomes. Difference in observed methylation between specific cell-subtypes is often of interest; however, available samples often comprise a mixture of cells. To date, cell-subtype estimates have been obtained from mixed-cell DNA data using linear regression models, but the accuracy of such estimates has not been critically assessed. We evaluated linear regression performance for cell-subtype specific methylation estimation using a 450K methylation array dataset of both mixed-cell and cell-subtype sorted samples from six healthy males. CpGs associated with each cell-subtype were first identified using t-tests between groups of cell-subtype sorted samples. Subsequent reduced panels of reliably accurate CpGs were identified from mixed-cell samples using an accuracy heuristic (D). Performance was assessed by comparing cell-subtype specific estimates from mixed-cells with corresponding cell-sorted mean using the mean absolute error (MAE) and the Coefficient of Determination (R2). At the cell-subtype level, methylation levels at 3272 CpGs could be estimated to within a MAE of 5% of the expected value. The cell-subtypes with the highest accuracy were CD56+ NK (R2 = 0.56) and CD8+T (R2 = 0.48), where 23% of sites were accurately estimated. Hierarchical clustering and pathways enrichment analysis confirmed the biological relevance of the panels. Our results suggest that linear regression for cell-subtype specific methylation estimation is accurate only for some cell-subtypes at a small fraction of cell-associated sites but may be applicable to EWASs of disease traits with a blood-based pathology. Although sample size was a limitation in this study, we suggest that alternative statistical methods will provide the greatest performance improvements.

Indexed as

EpigenomicsBlood CellsCell LineageCpG IslandsDNADNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleSignal TransductionTreatment OutcomeDNA

Identifiers

PMID30571772
PMCPMC6301777

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.