ArticleBMC bioinformatics2018
MeDEStrand: an improved method to infer genome-wide absolute methylation levels from DNA enrichment data.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- MEDIPIPE: an automated and comprehensive pipeline for cfMeDIP-seq data quality control and analysis.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Cell-free DNA methylation-defined prognostic subgroups in small-cell lung cancer identified by leukocyte methylation subtraction.iScience · 2022Article
- Developmental programming of DNA methylation and gene expression patterns is associated with extreme cardiovascular tolerance to anoxia in the common snapping turtle.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2021Article
- Tumor-Naïve Multimodal Profiling of Circulating Tumor DNA in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021Observational
- Preparation of cfMeDIP-seq libraries for methylome profiling of plasma cell-free DNA.Nature protocols · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDNA methylation of CpG dinucleotides is an essential epigenetic modification that plays a key role in transcription. Widely used DNA enrichment-based methods offer high coverage for measuring methylated CpG dinucleotides, with the lowest cost per CpG covered genome-wide. However, these methods measure the DNA enrichment of methyl-CpG binding, and thus do not provide information on absolute methylation levels. Further, the enrichment is influenced by various confounding factors in addition to methylation status, for example, CpG density. Computational models that can accurately derive absolute methylation levels from DNA enrichment data are needed.
resultsWe developed "MeDEStrand," a method that uses a sigmoid function to estimate and correct the CpG bias from enrichment results to infer absolute DNA methylation levels. Unlike previous methods, which estimate CpG bias based on reads mapped at the same genomic loci, MeDEStrand processes the reads for the positive and negative DNA strands separately. We compared the performance of MeDEStrand to that of three other state-of-the-art methods "MEDIPS," "BayMeth," and "QSEA" on four independent datasets generated using immortalized cell lines (GM12878 and K562) and human primary cells (foreskin fibroblasts and mammary epithelial cells). Based on the comparison of the inferred absolute methylation levels from MeDIP-seq data and the corresponding reduced-representation bisulfite sequencing data from each method, MeDEStrand showed the best performance at high resolution of 25, 50, and 100 base pairs.
conclusionsThe MeDEStrand tool can be used to infer whole-genome absolute DNA methylation levels at the same cost of enrichment-based methods with adequate accuracy and resolution. R package MeDEStrand and its tutorial is freely available for download at https://github.com/jxu1234/MeDEStrand.git .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.