Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33228774›Full record

ArticleEpigenetics & chromatin2020

Comparison of methylation capture sequencing and Infinium MethylationEPIC array in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.

Chang Shu, Xinyu Zhang, Bradley E Aouizerat, Ke Xu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Epigenetics & chromatin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chang ShuDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06516, USA.
Xinyu ZhangDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06516, USA.
Bradley E AouizeratBluestone Center for Clinical Research, College of Dentistry, New York University, New York, 10010, USA.
Ke XuDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06516, USA. ke.xu@yale.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6472-7052
Yale University · USCenter for Clinical Research (United States) · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Enhancing Discovery of HIV Host Genetics using Drug Abuse and other InteractionsR01DA038632 · NIDA · RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE · PI JOHNSON, ERIC OTTO · 2014 to 2018
$3.7M
Feature selection of DNA methylation biosignatures for neuropathy with comorbid drug abuse in the setting of HIV infectionR01DA047820 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI AOUIZERAT, BRADLEY E, XU, KE · 2018 to 2022
$2.9M
In vivo study of THC-induced immunogenome changes at single cell resolution in HIV-infected humansR01DA052846 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI XU, KE · 2020 to 2025
$2.5M
Defining the impact of injection drug use on antiretroviral therapy and HIV treatment outcomes: an (epi)genomic approachR01DA047063 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI AOUIZERAT, BRADLEY E, XU, KE · 2018 to 2022
$2.4M
Methylome-wide and mQTL analysis of HIV progression in the context of cocaine useR01DA042691 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI XU, KE · 2016 to 2019
$1.6M
Genome-wide DNA methylation in HIV infected drug usersR03DA039745 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI XU, KE · 2015 to 2016
$260k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIDA NIH HHS R01DA038632NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA042691NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA047063NIDA NIH HHS R01DA047063NIDA NIH HHS R01DA047820NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA052846NIDA NIH HHS R03DA039745
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) have been widely applied to identify methylation CpG sites associated with human disease. To date, the Infinium MethylationEPIC array (EPIC) is commonly used for high-throughput DNA methylation profiling. However, the EPIC array covers only 30% of the human methylome. Methylation Capture bisulfite sequencing (MC-seq) captures target regions of methylome and has advantages of extensive coverage in the methylome at an affordable price.

methodsEpigenome-wide DNA methylation in four peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples was profiled by using SureSelectXT Methyl-Seq for MC-seq and EPIC platforms separately. CpG site-based reproducibility of MC-seq was assessed with DNA sample inputs ranging in quantity of high (> 1000 ng), medium (300-1000 ng), and low (150 ng-300 ng). To compare the performance of MC-seq and the EPIC arrays, we conducted a Pearson correlation and methylation value difference at each CpG site that was detected by both MC-seq and EPIC. We compared the percentage and counts in each CpG island and gene annotation between MC-seq and the EPIC array.

resultsAfter quality control, an average of 3,708,550 CpG sites per sample were detected by MC-seq with DNA quantity > 1000 ng. Reproducibility of DNA methylation in MC-seq-detected CpG sites was high among samples with high, medium, and low DNA inputs (r > 0.96). The EPIC array captured an average of 846,464 CpG sites per sample. Compared with the EPIC array, MC-seq detected more CpGs in coding regions and CpG islands. Among the 472,540 CpG sites captured by both platforms, methylation of a majority of CpG sites was highly correlated in the same sample (r: 0.98-0.99). However, methylation for a small proportion of CpGs (N = 235) differed significantly between the two platforms, with differences in beta values of greater than 0.5.

conclusionsOur results show that MC-seq is an efficient and reliable platform for methylome profiling with a broader coverage of the methylome than the array-based platform. Although methylation measurements in majority of CpGs are highly correlated, a number of CpG sites show large discrepancy between the two platforms, which warrants further investigation and needs cautious interpretation.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationCpG IslandsHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySequence Analysis, DNADNA methylationEPICMethylation capture sequencingPeripheral blood mononuclear cells

Identifiers

PMID33228774
PMCPMC7684759
OpenAlexW3107798130

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.