ArticleGenome research2026
Epigenetic characterization of pseudogenes across human tissues.
Article in Genome research, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pseudogenes have historically been regarded as nonfunctional remnants of genome evolution. However, relative to other noncoding genomic elements, their promoter architecture and epigenetic regulation remain incompletely understood. Here, we systematically characterize pseudogene promoters and compare them with those of protein-coding genes and long noncoding RNAs. To do this, we integrate matched transcriptomic and epigenomic data across 26 human tissues from the EN-TEx (ENCODE-GTEx) project. We uniformly annotate promoters with chromatin features (histone modifications, chromatin accessibility, and DNA methylation), sequence motifs, and evolutionary conservation, generating an online catalog. Leveraging this catalog, we show that, across multiple tissues, transcribed, unprocessed pseudogenes exhibit chromatin patterns similar to those of active protein-coding genes. In contrast, transcribed, processed pseudogenes show a different pattern: most lack the canonical hallmarks of transcription (e.g., active histone marks) at their promoters. Instead, their promoters show increased overlap with LINE elements, enrichment for YY1-like binding motifs, and higher Hi-C contact frequency, particularly with distal enhancer-like regulatory regions. Together with their greater conservation (relative to unprocessed pseudogenes), these features suggest that the transcription of processed pseudogenes may require regulatory mechanisms distinct from canonical promoter-associated epigenetic activation.
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.