ArticleEpigenomes2025
Investigating Single-Molecule Molecular Inversion Probes for Medium-Scale Targeted DNA Methylation Analysis.
Article in Epigenomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Forensic genetics in the omics era.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEpigenetic biomarkers, particularly CpG methylation, are increasingly employed in clinical and forensic settings. However, we still lack a cost-effective, sensitive, medium-scale method for the analysis of hundreds to thousands of user-defined CpGs suitable for minute DNA input amounts (<10 ng). In this study, motivated by promising results in the genetics field, we investigated single-molecule molecular inversion probes (smMIPs) for simultaneous analysis of hundreds of CpGs by using an example set of 514 age-associated CpGs (Zhang model).
methodsFirst, we developed a novel smMIP design tool to suit bisulfite-converted DNA (Locksmith). Then, to optimize the capture process, we performed single-probe capture for ten selected, representative smMIPs. Based on this pilot, the full smMIP panel was tested under varying capture conditions, including hybridization and elongation temperature, smMIP and template DNA amounts, dNTP concentration and elongation time.
resultsOverall, we found that the capture efficiency was highly probe-(and hence, sequence-) dependent, with a heterogeneous coverage distribution across CpGs higher than the 1000-fold range. Considering CpGs with at least 20X coverage, we yielded robust methylation detection with levels comparable to those obtained from the gold standard EPIC microarray analysis (Pearsons's r: 0.96).
conclusionsThe observed low specificity and uniformity indicate that smMIPs in their current form are not compatible with the lowered complexity of bisulfite-converted DNA.
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.