Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38870532›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024

Supervised learning of enhancer-promoter specificity based on genome-wide perturbation studies highlights areas for improvement in learning.

Dylan Barth, Richard Van, Jonathan Cardwell, Mira V Han

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Dylan BarthSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, United States.
Richard VanSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, United States.
Jonathan CardwellDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO 80045, United States.
Mira V HanSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0488-1170

Funding

National Science Foundation 1750532
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationUnderstanding the rules that govern enhancer-driven transcription remains a central unsolved problem in genomics. Now with multiple massively parallel enhancer perturbation assays published, there are enough data that we can utilize to learn to predict enhancer-promoter (EP) relationships in a data-driven manner.

resultsWe applied machine learning to one of the largest enhancer perturbation studies integrated with transcription factor (TF) and histone modification ChIP-seq. The results uncovered a discrepancy in the prediction of genome-wide data compared to data from targeted experiments. Relative strength of contact was important for prediction, confirming the basic principle of EP regulation. Novel features such as the density of the enhancers/promoters in the genomic region was found to be important, highlighting our lack of understanding on how other elements in the region contribute to the regulation. Several TF peaks were identified that improved the prediction by identifying the negatives and reducing False Positives. In summary, integrating genomic assays with enhancer perturbation studies increased the accuracy of the model, and provided novel insights into the understanding of enhancer-driven transcription. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The trained models, data, and the source code are available at http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11290386 and https://github.com/HanLabUNLV/sleps.

Indexed as

Enhancer Elements, GeneticPromoter Regions, GeneticSupervised Machine LearningChromatin Immunoprecipitation SequencingGenomicsHumansTranscription FactorsTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID38870532
PMCPMC11211214

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.