Close to 60,000 papers mentioning DNA methylation have been published by April 2017, and more than 5000 of them were published last year alone [1]. This amounts to about 14 papers per day demonstrating an exploding interest for performing DNA methylation analyses. This is not surprising, considering the essential role DNA methylation plays in regulating gene expression [2], impacting essential processes such as cell differentiation. Inactivation of the DNA methyltransferases causes embryonic lethality in mice [3,4], underscoring the importance of correct DNA methylation patterns during normal development, with implications not only in health, but also disease.Aberrant DNA methylation has been reported in, for example, cardiovascular [5], neurodegenerative [6] and metabolic [7] disease. A link between DNA methylation and cancer was demonstrated as early as 1983, when a substantial proportion of CpG sites that were methylated in normal tissues were found to be unmethylated in cancer cells [8]. This hypomethylation, frequently seen early in cancer development, is commonly followed by locus-specific hypermethylation. Large-scale analyses have shown that DNA methylation aberrations are frequently present in cancers [9] and that DNA methylation profiling enables distinguishing cancer subtypes [10] and classifying cancers of unknown primary origin [11].A variety of DNA methylation aberrations have been suggested as biomarkers for early detection, prognostication and monitoring of cancer, including in noninvasive clinical material such as blood, stool, urine and bile. Great hopes are also tied to DNA methylation as a direct target for epigenetic therapy. Technological advancements, including genome-wide profiling of DNA methylation aberrations in groups of diseased individuals and healthy controls, are supporting a steady increase in the number of DNA methylation based biomarkers, especially for cancer.However, despite the enormous amount of papers that are being published on DNA methylation, hardly any of these findings enter routine clinical practice. This low success rate can be explained by the observation that the DNA methylation marker field suffers from general methodological issues that affect biomedical and biomarker research, such as insufficiently stringent methodology, low-quality reporting (including lack of adherence to reporting guidelines such as CONSORT, STARD, "Only when including quality and standardization at every level of DNA methylation analyses, will we be able to achieve the robustness to independently validate DNA methylation analyses and to compare multiple methylation studies in systematic reviews. This is the only way to more efficiently develop future DNA methylation based biomarkers."Manon van Engeland