Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35567415›Full record

ArticleHuman molecular genetics2022

Evaluation of nanopore sequencing for epigenetic epidemiology: a comparison with DNA methylation microarrays.

Robert Flynn, Sam Washer, Aaron R Jeffries, Alexandria Andrayas, Gemma Shireby, Meena Kumari, Leonard C Schalkwyk, Jonathan Mill, Eilis Hannon

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human molecular genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. DNA Sequencing and the Third-Generation Sequencing Revolution.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  10. DNA Methylation in Alzheimer's Disease.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Robert FlynnUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
Sam WasherUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
Aaron R JeffriesUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
Alexandria AndrayasSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK.
Gemma ShirebyUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
Meena KumariInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester CO3 3LG, UK.
Leonard C SchalkwykSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK.
Jonathan MillUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
Eilis HannonUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6840-072X
University of Exeter · GBUniversity of Essex · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M008924/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most epigenetic epidemiology to date has utilized microarrays to identify positions in the genome where variation in DNA methylation is associated with environmental exposures or disease. However, these profile less than 3% of DNA methylation sites in the human genome, potentially missing affected loci and preventing the discovery of disrupted biological pathways. Third generation sequencing technologies, including Nanopore sequencing, have the potential to revolutionize the generation of epigenetic data, not only by providing genuine genome-wide coverage but profiling epigenetic modifications direct from native DNA. Here we assess the viability of using Nanopore sequencing for epidemiology by performing a comparison with DNA methylation quantified using the most comprehensive microarray available, the Illumina EPIC array. We implemented a CRISPR-Cas9 targeted sequencing approach in concert with Nanopore sequencing to profile DNA methylation in three genomic regions to attempt to rediscover genomic positions that existing technologies have shown are differentially methylated in tobacco smokers. Using Nanopore sequencing reads, DNA methylation was quantified at 1779 CpGs across three regions, providing a finer resolution of DNA methylation patterns compared to the EPIC array. The correlation of estimated levels of DNA methylation between platforms was high. Furthermore, we identified 12 CpGs where hypomethylation was significantly associated with smoking status, including 10 within the AHRR gene. In summary, Nanopore sequencing is a valid option for identifying genomic loci where large differences in DNAm are associated with a phenotype and has the potential to advance our understanding of the role differential methylation plays in the etiology of complex disease.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationNanopore SequencingCpG IslandsEpigenesis, GeneticEpigenomicsHumans

Identifiers

PMID35567415
PMCPMC9476619
OpenAlexW4280609986

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.