MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CoMeBack: DNA methylation array data analysis for co-methylated regions

2020· article· en· W3003794061 on OpenAlexafffund
Evan Gatev, Nicole Gladish, Sara Mostafavi, Michael S. Kobor

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalPacific Centre for Reproductive MedicineSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDNA methylationMethylationDNAComputational biologyMethylated DNA immunoprecipitationGeneticsBiologyComputer scienceGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: High-dimensional DNA methylation (DNAm) array coverage, while sparse in the context of the entire DNA methylome, still constitutes a very large number of CpG probes. The ensuing multiple-test corrections affect the statistical power to detect associations, likely contributing to prevalent limited reproducibility. Array probes measuring proximal CpG sites often have correlated levels of DNAm that may not only be biologically meaningful but also imply statistical dependence and redundancy. New methods that account for such correlations between adjacent probes may enable improved specificity, discovery and interpretation of statistical associations in DNAm array data. RESULTS: We developed a method named Co-Methylation with genomic CpG Background (CoMeBack) that estimates DNA co-methylation, defined as proximal CpG probes with correlated DNAm across individuals. CoMeBack outputs co-methylated regions (CMRs), spanning sets of array probes constructed based on all genomic CpG sites, including those not measured on the array, and without any phenotypic variable inputs. This approach can reduce the multiple-test correction burden, while enhancing the discovery and specificity of statistical associations. We constructed and validated CMRs in whole blood, using publicly available Illumina Infinium 450 K array data from over 5000 individuals. These CMRs were enriched for enhancer chromatin states, and binding site motifs for several transcription factors involved in blood physiology. We illustrated how CMR-based epigenome-wide association studies can improve discovery and reduce false positives for associations with chronological age. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://bitbucket.org/flopflip/comeback. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations75
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207