MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414497714 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.23.678180

Chromatin landscape and enhancer-gene interaction differences between three cardiac cell types

2025· preprint· en· W4414497714 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Christophe Grenier, Raphaël Poujol, Svenja Koslowski, Olivier Tastet, Chang Jie Mick Lee, Matthew Ackers‐Johnson, Roger Foo, Julie Hussin

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatinSingle-nucleotide polymorphismEnhancerGeneMechanism (biology)Cell typeChromatin immunoprecipitationGenome-wide association studyChromosome conformation capture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) associated with a specific traits and diseases, however, uncovering the true disease-relevant SNPs remains challenging. One limitation for prioritizing true disease-relevant SNPs from GWAS is that most of the identified SNPs are non-coding, making it difficult to unravel their mechanism of action. Nevertheless, mapping non-coding SNPs to enhancers is a validated approach to link SNPs to their target genes through the analysis of enhancer-gene interactions (EGI) and thus provide insight into their mechanism of action. While previous studies linking cardiac disease-relevant SNPs to enhancers and their target genes have focused on the principal cardiac cell type, cardiomyocytes (CMs), the analysis of other non-CM cell types has been largely ignored and has only gained attention recently. We hypothesize that characterizing cell-type-specific enhancer-gene interactions (EGIs) for these non-CMs, namely cardiac fibroblasts (CFs), endothelial cells (ECs), and smooth muscle cells (SMCs), followed by mapping cardiac-disease-associated non-coding SNPs to those enhancers will identify novel disease-relevant genes and provide insights for future mechanistic research. To identify the landscape of cell-type-specific EGIs in these cardiac cells, we have employed the activity-by-Contact (ABC) model. It integrates assay for transposase-accessible chromatin sequencing (ATAC-seq), H3K27ac chromatin immunoprecipitation with sequencing (ChIP-seq), and high-throughput chromosome conformation capture with H3K27ac immunoprecipitation (H3K27ac HiChIP) data to identify EGIs. We have identified the landscape of cell-type-specific EGIs in these cardiac cells. Furthermore, a higher similarity of the chromatin accessibility profile (ATAC-seq) between CF and SMC, compared to CF and EC, and SMC and EC was observed. Finally, overlapping identified EGIs with cardiac-disease-associated non-coding variants has allowed the identification of a QT-interval-associated SNP that is mapped to the enhancer region of an EC-specific EGI.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCardiac Fibrosis and RemodelingFrench-language works237,207