Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31615113›Full record

ArticleGenes2019

D-GPM: A Deep Learning Method for Gene Promoter Methylation Inference.

Xingxin Pan, Biao Liu, Xingzhao Wen, Yulu Liu, Xiuqing Zhang, Shengbin Li, Shuaicheng Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Machine Learning in Epigenomics: Insights into Cancer Biology and Medicine.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Reviews on cancer · 2021
    Review
  7. AgeGuess, a Methylomic Prediction Model for Human Ages.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Xingxin PanBGI Education Center, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518083, China. panxingxin16@mails.ucas.ac.cn.
Biao LiuBGI Education Center, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518083, China. biaoliu2019@gmail.com.
Xingzhao WenSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China. wenxingzhao1227@gmail.com.
Yulu LiuBGI Education Center, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518083, China. liuyulu@genomics.cn.
Xiuqing ZhangBGI Education Center, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518083, China. liuyulu@genomics.cn.
Shengbin LiCollege of Medicine and Forensics, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710061, China. yangsh@genomics.cn.
Shuaicheng LiDepartment of Computer Science, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong. shuaicli@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole-genome bisulfite sequencing generates a comprehensive profiling of the gene methylation levels, but is limited by a high cost. Recent studies have partitioned the genes into landmark genes and target genes and suggested that the landmark gene expression levels capture adequate information to reconstruct the target gene expression levels. This inspired us to propose that the methylation level of the promoters in landmark genes might be adequate to reconstruct the promoter methylation level of target genes, which would eventually reduce the cost of promoter methylation profiling. Here, we propose a deep learning model called Deep-Gene Promoter Methylation (D-GPM) to predict the whole-genome promoter methylation level based on the promoter methylation profile of the landmark genes from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). D-GPM-15%-7000 × 5, the optimal architecture of D-GPM, acquires the least overall mean absolute error (MAE) and the highest overall Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), with values of 0.0329 and 0.8186, respectively, when testing data. Additionally, the D-GPM outperforms the regression tree (RT), linear regression (LR), and the support vector machine (SVM) in 95.66%, 92.65%, and 85.49% of the target genes by virtue of its relatively lower MAE and in 98.25%, 91.00%, and 81.56% of the target genes based on its relatively higher PCC, respectively. More importantly, the D-GPM predominates in predicting 79.86% and 78.34% of the target genes according to the model distribution of the least MAE and the highest PCC, respectively.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDNA MethylationPromoter Regions, GeneticComputational BiologyCpG IslandsGene ExpressionGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression RegulationHumansLinear ModelsMachine LearningSequence Analysis, DNAdeep neural networklandmark genesmachine learningpromoter methylationtarget genes

Identifiers

PMID31615113
PMCPMC6826513

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.