ArticleBMC bioinformatics2024
Internal and external normalization of nascent RNA sequencing run-on experiments.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-omics and biochemical reconstitution reveal CDK7-dependent mechanisms controlling RNA polymerase II function at gene 5'- and 3' ends.Cell reports · 2025Article
- Atlas of nascent RNA transcripts reveals tissue-specific enhancer to gene linkages.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- TFIIH kinase CDK7 drives cell proliferation through a common core transcription factor network.Science advances · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In experiments with significant perturbations to transcription, nascent RNA sequencing protocols are dependent on external spike-ins for reliable normalization. Unlike in RNA-seq, these spike-ins are not standardized and, in many cases, depend on a run-on reaction that is assumed to have constant efficiency across samples. To assess the validity of this assumption, we analyze a large number of published nascent RNA spike-ins to quantify their variability across existing normalization methods. Furthermore, we develop a new biologically-informed Bayesian model to estimate the error in spike-in based normalization estimates, which we term Virtual Spike-In (VSI). We apply this method both to published external spike-ins as well as using reads at the [Formula: see text] end of long genes, building on prior work from Mahat (Mol Cell 62(1):63-78, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.02.025 ) and Vihervaara (Nat Commun 8(1):255, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00151-0 ). We find that spike-ins in existing nascent RNA experiments are typically under sequenced, with high variability between samples. Furthermore, we show that these high variability estimates can have significant downstream effects on analysis, complicating biological interpretations of results.
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.