Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40127183›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025

SC-VAR: a computational tool for interpreting polygenic disease risks using single-cell epigenomic data.

Gefei Zhao, Binbin Lai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Gefei ZhaoInstitute of Medical Technology, Peking University Health Science Center, 38 Xueyuan Rd, Hai Dian Qu, Beijing 100191, China.
Binbin LaiInstitute of Medical Technology, Peking University Health Science Center, 38 Xueyuan Rd, Hai Dian Qu, Beijing 100191, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2831-2677

Funding

Science Fund Program for Distinguished Young Scholars of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationOne major challenge of interpreting variants from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of complex traits or diseases is how to efficiently annotate noncoding variants. These variants influence gene expression by disrupting cis-regulatory elements (CREs), whose spatial and cell-type specificity are not adequately captured by conventional tools like multi-marker analysis of genomic annotation. Current methods either rely on linear proximity to genes or quantitative trait locus (QTL) data yet fail to integrate single-cell epigenomic information for a comprehensive annotation.

resultsWe present SC-VAR, a novel computational tool designed to enhance the interpretation of disease-associated risks from GWAS using single-cell epigenomic data. SC-VAR leverages single-cell epigenomic data to predict functional outcomes including risk genes, pathways, and cell types for both coding and noncoding disease-associated variants. We demonstrate that SC-VAR outperforms state-of-the-art methods by predicting more validated disease-related genes and pathways for multiple diseases. Additionally, SC-VAR identifies cell types that are susceptible to disease, along with their specific CREs and target genes linked to risk. By capturing a broad range of disease risks across human tissues at distinct developmental stages, SC-VAR could enhance our understanding of disease mechanisms in complex tissues across different life stages.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyEpigenomicsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseMultifactorial InheritanceSingle-Cell AnalysisSoftwareGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansQuantitative Trait Locidisease relevance scoregenome-wide association studies (GWAS)noncoding variant annotationpolygenic disease riskssingle-cell epigenomics

Identifiers

PMID40127183
PMCPMC11932087

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.