ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Re-analysis of CLAP data affirms PRC2 as an RNA binding protein.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Using CLAP methodology, Guo et al. recently concluded that PRC2 is not an RNA binding protein (RBP). They suggest that prior findings were CLIP artifacts and argue against RNA's direct role in PRC2 regulation. Here, we re-analyze their raw datasets and reach contrary conclusions. Through an independent computational pipeline, we observe significant PRC2 enrichment throughout the transcriptome, including XIST. Applying the authors' published computational pipeline also reaffirms PRC2 as an RBP. Detailed investigation of the authors' pipeline reveals several unconventional practices. First, Guo et al. retained reads from foreign species and other unmappable reads to obtain a normalization factor. Second, they selectively removed read duplicates from the mappable fraction, while retaining them in the unmappable fraction. Finally, the authors applied an arbitrary cutoff for enrichment values in XIST. Their pipeline thereby inflated PRC2's background reads and suppressed mappable signals, creating the impression that PRC2 is not a robust RBP.
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.