Multi-tissue DNA methylation microarray signature is predictive of gene function

References

• The FANTOM Consortium. A promoter-level mammalian expression atlas. Nature. 2014;507(7493):462–470.
   Google Scholar
• Langfelder P, Horvath S. WGCNA: an R package for weighted correlation network analysis. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008;9:559.
   Google Scholar
• Pavlidis P, Gillis J. Progress and challenges in the computational prediction of gene function using networks: 2012-2013 update. F1000Res. 2013;2:230.
   Google Scholar
• van Dam S, Võsa U, van der Graaf A, et al. Gene co-expression analysis for functional classification and gene-disease predictions. Brief Bioinform. 2018;19(4):575–592.
   Google Scholar
• Wang R, Zhu H, Yang M, et al. DNA methylation profiling analysis identifies a DNA methylation signature for predicting prognosis and recurrence of lung adenocarcinoma. Oncol Lett. 2019;18(6):5831–5842.
   Google Scholar
• Hartl CL, Ramaswami G, Pembroke WG, et al. Coexpression network architecture reveals the brain-wide and multiregional basis of disease susceptibility. Nat Neurosci. 2021;24(9):1313–1323.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang X, Zhang H, Quan XW. Differentially coexpressed disease gene identification based on gene coexpression network. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016.
   Google Scholar
• Hibbs MA, Hess DC, Myers CL, et al. Exploring the functional landscape of gene expression: directed search of large microarray compendia. Bioinformatics. 2007;23(20):2692–2699.
   Google Scholar
• Piovesan D, Giollo M, Ferrari C, et al. Protein function prediction using guilty by association from interaction networks. Amino Acids. 2015;47(12):2583–2592.
   Google Scholar
• Mihelcic M, Smuc T, Supek F. Patterns of diverse gene functions in genomic neighborhoods predict gene function and phenotype. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):19537.
   Google Scholar
• Horvath S. DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol. 2013;14(10):R115.
   Google Scholar
• Okae H, Chiba H, Hiura H, et al. Genome-wide analysis of DNA methylation dynamics during early human development. PLoS Genet. 2014;10(12):e1004868.
   Google Scholar
• Lister R, Mukamel EA, Nery JR, et al. Global epigenomic reconfiguration during mammalian brain development. Science. 2013;341(6146):1237905.
   Google Scholar
• Lokk K, Modhukur V, Rajashekar B, et al. DNA methylome profiling of human tissues identifies global and tissue-specific methylation patterns. Genome Biol. 2014;15(4):r54.
   Google Scholar
• Kang JG, Park JS, Ko JH, et al. Regulation of gene expression by altered promoter methylation using a CRISPR/Cas9-mediated epigenetic editing system. Sci. Rep. 2019;9(1):11960.
   Google Scholar
• Ehrlich M. Expression of various genes is controlled by DNA methylation during mammalian development. J Cell Biochem. 2003;88(5):899–910.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg MVC, Bourc’his D. The diverse roles of DNA methylation in mammalian development and disease. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2019;20(10):590–607.
   Google Scholar
• Okano M, Bell DW, Haber DA, et al. DNA methyltransferases Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b are essential for de novo methylation and mammalian development. Cell. 1999;99(3):247–257.
   Google Scholar
• Dor Y, Cedar H. Principles of DNA methylation and their implications for biology and medicine. Lancet. 2018;392(10149):777–786.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzone R, Zwergel C, Artico M, et al. The emerging role of epigenetics in human autoimmune disorders. Clin. Epigenetics. 2019;11(1):34.
   Google Scholar
• Liu XS, Wu H, Ji X, et al. Editing DNA methylation in the mammalian genome. Cell. 2016;167(1):233–247.e17.
   Google Scholar
• Wang T, Guan W, Lin J, et al. A systematic study of normalization methods for infinium 450K methylation data using whole-genome bisulfite sequencing data. Epigenetics. 2015;10(7):662–669.
   Google Scholar
• Capper D, Jones DTW, Sill M, et al. DNA methylation-based classification of central nervous system tumours. Nature. 2018;555(7697):469–474.
   Google Scholar
• Korthauer K, Irizarry RA. Genome-wide repressive capacity of promoter DNA methylation is revealed through epigenomic manipulation. bioRxiv. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Gaiti F, Chaligne R, Gu H, et al. Epigenetic evolution and lineage histories of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Nature. 2019;569(7757):576–580.
   Google Scholar
• Joubert BR, Felix J, Yousefi P, et al. DNA methylation in newborns and maternal smoking in pregnancy: genome-wide consortium meta-analysis. Am J Hum Genet. 2016;98(4):680–696.
   Google Scholar
• Lei Y, Zhang X, Su J, et al. Targeted DNA methylation in vivo using an engineered dCas9-MQ1 fusion protein. Nat Commun. 2017;8:16026.
   Google Scholar
• Galonska C, Charlton J, Mattei AL, et al. Genome-wide tracking of dCas9-methyltransferase footprints. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):597.
   Google Scholar
• Dozmorov MG, Giles CB, Wren JD. Predicting gene ontology from a global meta-analysis of 1-color microarray experiments. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011;12(Suppl 10):S14.
   Google Scholar
• Lachmann A, Torre D, Keenan AB, et al. Massive mining of publicly available RNA-seq data from human and mouse. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):1366.
   Google Scholar
• Zhong H, Kim S, Zhi D, et al. Predicting gene expression using DNA methylation in three human populations. PeerJ. 2019;7:e6757.
   Google Scholar
• Testa R, Vanhooren V, Bonfigli AR, et al. N-glycomic changes in serum proteins in type 2 diabetes mellitus correlate with complications and with metabolic syndrome parameters. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0119983.
   Google Scholar
• Tsankov AM, Wadsworth MH, Akopian V, et al. Loss of DNA methyltransferase activity in primed human ES cells triggers increased cell-cell variability and transcriptional repression. Development. 2019;146(19). doi:10.1242/dev.174722.
   Google Scholar
• Edgar R, Domrachev M, Lash AE. Gene expression omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30(1):207–210.
   Google Scholar
• Giles CB, Brown CA, Ripperger M, et al. ALE: automated label extraction from GEO metadata. BMC Bioinformatics. 2017;18(14):509.
   Google Scholar
• Kinsella RJ, Kahari A, Haider S, et al. Ensembl BioMarts: a hub for data retrieval across taxonomic space. Database-the J of Biological Databases and Curation. 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Dale RK, Pedersen BS, Quinlan AR. Pybedtools: a flexible Python library for manipulating genomic datasets and annotations. Bioinformatics. 2011;27(24):3423–3424.
   Google Scholar
• Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach Learn Res. 2011;12:2825–2830.
   Google Scholar
• Shayevitch R, Askayo D, Keydar I, et al. The importance of DNA methylation of exons on alternative splicing. RNA. 2018;24(10):1351–1362.
   Google Scholar
• Kuleshov MV, Jones MR, Rouillard AD, et al. Enrichr: a comprehensive gene set enrichment analysis web server 2016 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(W1):W90–W97.
   Google Scholar
• Chen EY, Thompson P, Ananiadou S, et al. Enrichr: interactive and collaborative HTML5 gene list enrichment analysis tool. Bmc Bioinformatics. 2013;14:14.
   Google Scholar
• Gillis J, Pavlidis P. Characterizing the state of the art in the computational assignment of gene function: lessons from the first critical assessment of functional annotation (CAFA). BMC Bioinformatics. 2013;14(Suppl 3):S15.
   Google Scholar
• Slieker RC, van Iterson M, Luijk R, et al. Age-related accrual of methylomic variability is linked to fundamental ageing mechanisms. Genome Biol. 2016;17(1):191.
   Google Scholar
• Maddocks ODK, Labuschagne CF, Adams PD, et al. Serine metabolism supports the methionine cycle and dna/rna methylation through de novo atp synthesis in cancer cells. Mol. Cell. 2016;61(2):210–221.
   Google Scholar
• Bartrons R, Simon-Molas H, Rodríguez-García A, et al. Fructose 2,6-bisphosphate in cancer cell metabolism. Front. Oncol. 2018;8:331.
   Google Scholar
• Yang X, Han H, De Carvalho D, et al. Gene body methylation can alter gene expression and is a therapeutic target in cancer. Cancer Cell. 2014;26(4):577–590.
   Google Scholar
• Arechederra M, Daian F, Yim A, et al. Hypermethylation of gene body CpG Islands predicts high dosage of functional oncogenes in liver cancer. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):3164.
   Google Scholar
• Ball MP, Li JB, Gao Y, et al. Targeted and genome-scale strategies reveal gene-body methylation signatures in human cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2009;27(4):361–368.
   Google Scholar
• Dozmorov MG. Polycomb repressive complex 2 epigenomic signature defines age-associated hypermethylation and gene expression changes. Epigenetics. 2015;10(6):484–495.
   Google Scholar
• Bannister AJ, Kouzarides T. Regulation of chromatin by histone modifications. Cell Res. 2011;21(3):381–395.
   Google Scholar
• Hashimshony T, Zhang J, Keshet I, et al. The role of DNA methylation in setting up chromatin structure during development. Nat Genet. 2003;34(2):187–192.
   Google Scholar
• Jjingo D, Conley AB, Yi SV, et al. On the presence and role of human gene-body DNA methylation. Oncotarget. 2012;3(4):462–474.
   Google Scholar
• Mendizabal I, Zeng J, Keller TE, et al. Body-hypomethylated human genes harbor extensive intragenic transcriptional activity and are prone to cancer-associated dysregulation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45(8):4390–4400.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou N, Jiang Y, Bergquist TR, et al. The CAFA challenge reports improved protein function prediction and new functional annotations for hundreds of genes through experimental screens. Genome Biol. 2019;20(1):244.
   Google Scholar
• Maunakea AK, Chepelev I, Cui K, et al. Intragenic DNA methylation modulates alternative splicing by recruiting MeCP2 to promote exon recognition. Cell Res. 2013;23(11):1256–1269.
   Google Scholar