Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41298606›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

MethPy: a new software for analyzing non-CpG methylation after bisulfite assay and Sanger sequencing.

Martina Roiati, Luiza Diniz Ferreira Borges, Andrea Cattani, Marco Lucarelli, Andrea Fuso

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Martina RoiatiDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Luiza Diniz Ferreira BorgesDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Andrea CattaniIndependent Researcher, 39100, Bozen, Italy.
Marco LucarelliDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Andrea FusoDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. andrea.fuso@uniroma1.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the advent of "methylomic" analyses, bisulfite modification of genomic DNA followed by Sanger sequencing remains the most precise assay for investigating the methylation profile of specific sequences at single-cytosine resolution. We and others highlighted the possibility that cytosine methylation outside the canonical CpG dinucleotides-indicated as "non-CpG" or "CpH" methylation-can be significantly present, particularly in brain cells and tissues and that these non-CpG methyl-groups also display a functional role in modulating gene expression. The sequencing output obtained after bisulfite assay needs to be compared to the reference sequence to identify the modified cytosines. This task can be performed through software-assisted analysis but, so far, limitedly at the CpG moieties. To address this gap, the MethPy software has been developed to analyze non-CpG methylation profiles in an automated manner. MethPy was programmed in Python and enables the comparison of bisulfite-modified sequences with their corresponding genomic ones. The results are immediately showed with the option to show multiple output formats (text, tables, and graphs). To our knowledge, this is the first tool that allows the analysis of non-CpG methylation at single-base resolution and may contribute to streamlining and accelerating the analysis of Sanger sequencing of bisulfite PCR products.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationSequence Analysis, DNASoftwareSulfitesCpG IslandsHumanshydrogen sulfiteSulfitesBisulfite assayCpH methylationDNA methylationMethylation analysisNon-CpG methylation

Identifiers

PMID41298606
PMCPMC12657857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.