Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42793271›Full record

ArticleCurrent issues in molecular biology2026

Cross-Scale Convergence in Epigenetic Gene Regulation: A Perspective on Functional Enrichment Analytics for Cancer.

Adam G Marsh, Ashley S Doane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current issues in molecular biology, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Adam G MarshCenter for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6934-079X
Ashley S DoaneSignPost Cancer Analytics, Inc., Kingston, ON P.O. Box 26, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1489-1786

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epigenetic regulation of gene expression is studied at three physical scales: micro: DNA sequence-level methylation/demethylation; meso: nucleosome occupancy and remodeling; and macro: chromosomal domain silencing by Polycomb complexes, heterochromatin, and topologically associating domain (TAD) boundaries. The challenge to fully understand epigenetic gene regulation patterns is that these scales are not independent. Their influence overlaps and they share a recurring architectural theme across scales of a targeted molecular pattern followed by cooperative, feedback-driven, spatially bounded spreading. We argue here that disruption of this shared architecture at any one scale is independently sufficient to tip a bistable silencing domain into an oncogenic state. This paper discusses how such a cross-scale architectural rule set has concrete implications (yet underexploited) for computational cancer epigenomics, e.g., functional enrichment analyses generally focus on epigenetic features at one scale as an independent line of evidence, ignoring corroborating signals that could be reinforced by underlying hierarchical levels. This paper outlines options for functional enrichment statistics that combine multiple corroborating molecular features within a scale and corroborating evidence across scales into composite confidence scores calibrated against an empirical null that preserves correlations between assays. We propose benchmarking this approach against conventional single-feature enrichment in matched multi-omic cancer datasets as a direct test of the model.

Indexed as

bistabilitycancer epigenomicschromatin remodelingcross-scale regulationDNA methylationepigeneticsfunctional enrichment analysismulti-omic data integrationPolycomb repressive complextopologically associating domains

Identifiers

PMID42793271
PMCPMC13605700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.