2019
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz612
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting the effects of SNPs on transcription factor binding affinity

Abstract: Motivation Genome-wide association studies have revealed that 88% of disease-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) reside in noncoding regions. However, noncoding SNPs remain understudied, partly because they are challenging to prioritize for experimental validation. To address this deficiency, we developed the SNP effect matrix pipeline (SEMpl). Results SEMpl estimates transcription factor-binding affinity by obs… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is noteworthy that the identification of a TF with the help of listed methods requires the prior knowledge about the TFBSs harboring SNPs and this knowledge is usually acquired by bioinformatics analysis of the corresponding DNA sequence. Currently, different models of TFBSs, specialized databases, and the related tools are widely used for TFBS prediction, functional annotation of sequence variants, and prediction of the SNP impact on TF binding [ 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ] and others. Moreover, the closer the result of bioinformatics analysis to the truth, the fewer labor and funds spent on the corresponding experiments.…”
Section: Modern Array Of Methods For Studying Individual Rsnpsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is noteworthy that the identification of a TF with the help of listed methods requires the prior knowledge about the TFBSs harboring SNPs and this knowledge is usually acquired by bioinformatics analysis of the corresponding DNA sequence. Currently, different models of TFBSs, specialized databases, and the related tools are widely used for TFBS prediction, functional annotation of sequence variants, and prediction of the SNP impact on TF binding [ 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ] and others. Moreover, the closer the result of bioinformatics analysis to the truth, the fewer labor and funds spent on the corresponding experiments.…”
Section: Modern Array Of Methods For Studying Individual Rsnpsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of note, this pattern is not seen for another transcription factor, CEBPB, where the SEMplMe output for methylated sites is highly correlated between all cell types examined (K562, IMR-90, HepG2, and GM12878), suggesting that not all transcription factors are subject to cell type specificity due to methylation differences ( Supplementary Figure 2). Interestingly, SEMpl data without methylation appears to be primarily cell type agnostic, providing evidence that methylation plays a meaningful role in cell type specificity for some transcription factors (Nishizaki et al , 2020) .…”
Section: Dna Methylation Drives Cell Type Specific Transcription Factmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…To address this need, we have adapted SEMpl, a computational genome-wide transcription factor binding affinity prediction method, to incorporate whole genome bisulfite-seq (WGBS) data. This allows our predictions to include the effects of DNA methylation on binding affinity (Nishizaki et al , 2020) . SEMpl uses open-source in vivo data to generate predictions using transcription factor binding data from ChIP-seq and open chromatin data from DNase-seq for a transcription factor of interest.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(1) TFBS polymorphisms comprise only 8% of the genome polymorphisms but 31% of the trait-associated polymorphisms identified by GWAS [8]. (2) Up to 21.6% of variants affecting gene expression overlap annotated TFBSs [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%