Literature DB >> 35794707

Systematic evaluation of cell-type deconvolution pipelines for sequencing-based bulk DNA methylomes.

Yunhee Jeong1,2, Lisa Barros de Andrade E Sousa3, Dominik Thalmeier3, Reka Toth1, Marlene Ganslmeier1, Kersten Breuer1, Christoph Plass1, Pavlo Lutsik1.   

Abstract

DNA methylation analysis by sequencing is becoming increasingly popular, yielding methylomes at single-base pair and single-molecule resolution. It has tremendous potential for cell-type heterogeneity analysis using intrinsic read-level information. Although diverse deconvolution methods were developed to infer cell-type composition based on bulk sequencing-based methylomes, systematic evaluation has not been performed yet. Here, we thoroughly benchmark six previously published methods: Bayesian epiallele detection, DXM, PRISM, csmFinder+coMethy, ClubCpG and MethylPurify, together with two array-based methods, MeDeCom and Houseman, as a comparison group. Sequencing-based deconvolution methods consist of two main steps, informative region selection and cell-type composition estimation, thus each was individually assessed. With this elaborate evaluation, we aimed to establish which method achieves the highest performance in different scenarios of synthetic bulk samples. We found that cell-type deconvolution performance is influenced by different factors depending on the number of cell types within the mixture. Finally, we propose a best-practice deconvolution strategy for sequencing data and point out limitations that need to be handled. Array-based methods-both reference-based and reference-free-generally outperformed sequencing-based methods, despite the absence of read-level information. This implies that the current sequencing-based methods still struggle with correctly identifying cell-type-specific signals and eliminating confounding methylation patterns, which needs to be handled in future studies.
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA methylomes; computational epigenetics; deconvolution; heterogeneity; sequencing

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35794707      PMCID: PMC9294431          DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbac248

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brief Bioinform        ISSN: 1467-5463            Impact factor:   13.994


  58 in total

1.  High density DNA methylation array with single CpG site resolution.

Authors:  Marina Bibikova; Bret Barnes; Chan Tsan; Vincent Ho; Brandy Klotzle; Jennie M Le; David Delano; Lu Zhang; Gary P Schroth; Kevin L Gunderson; Jian-Bing Fan; Richard Shen
Journal:  Genomics       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 5.736

2.  Single-cell multiomics sequencing and analyses of human colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Shuhui Bian; Yu Hou; Xin Zhou; Xianlong Li; Jun Yong; Yicheng Wang; Wendong Wang; Jia Yan; Boqiang Hu; Hongshan Guo; Jilian Wang; Shuai Gao; Yunuo Mao; Ji Dong; Ping Zhu; Dianrong Xiu; Liying Yan; Lu Wen; Jie Qiao; Fuchou Tang; Wei Fu
Journal:  Science       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Detection of Circulating Tumor DNA in Plasma: A Potential Biomarker for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Matthew Egyud; Mohamedtaki Tejani; Arjun Pennathur; James Luketich; Praveen Sridhar; Emiko Yamada; Anders Ståhlberg; Stefan Filges; Paul Krzyzanowski; Jennifer Jackson; Irina Kalatskaya; Wei Jiao; Gradon Nielsen; Zhongren Zhou; Virginia Litle; Lincoln Stein; Tony Godfrey
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  MethylPurify: tumor purity deconvolution and differential methylation detection from single tumor DNA methylomes.

Authors:  Xiaoqi Zheng; Qian Zhao; Hua-Jun Wu; Wei Li; Haiyun Wang; Clifford A Meyer; Qian Alvin Qin; Han Xu; Chongzhi Zang; Peng Jiang; Fuqiang Li; Yong Hou; Jianxing He; Jun Wang; Jun Wang; Peng Zhang; Yong Zhang; Xiaole Shirley Liu
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 13.583

5.  Guidelines for cell-type heterogeneity quantification based on a comparative analysis of reference-free DNA methylation deconvolution software.

Authors:  Clémentine Decamps; Florian Privé; Raphael Bacher; Daniel Jost; Arthur Waguet; Eugene Andres Houseman; Eugene Lurie; Pavlo Lutsik; Aleksandar Milosavljevic; Michael Scherer; Michael G B Blum; Magali Richard
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  The relationship of DNA methylation with age, gender and genotype in twins and healthy controls.

Authors:  Marco P Boks; Eske M Derks; Daniel J Weisenberger; Erik Strengman; Esther Janson; Iris E Sommer; René S Kahn; Roel A Ophoff
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-08-26       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Reference-free deconvolution, visualization and interpretation of complex DNA methylation data using DecompPipeline, MeDeCom and FactorViz.

Authors:  Michael Scherer; Petr V Nazarov; Reka Toth; Shashwat Sahay; Tony Kaoma; Valentin Maurer; Nikita Vedeneev; Christoph Plass; Thomas Lengauer; Jörn Walter; Pavlo Lutsik
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 13.491

8.  BayesCCE: a Bayesian framework for estimating cell-type composition from DNA methylation without the need for methylation reference.

Authors:  Elior Rahmani; Regev Schweiger; Liat Shenhav; Theodora Wingert; Ira Hofer; Eilon Gabel; Eleazar Eskin; Eran Halperin
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 13.583

Review 9.  Tumor microenvironment complexity and therapeutic implications at a glance.

Authors:  Roghayyeh Baghban; Leila Roshangar; Rana Jahanban-Esfahlan; Khaled Seidi; Abbas Ebrahimi-Kalan; Mehdi Jaymand; Saeed Kolahian; Tahereh Javaheri; Peyman Zare
Journal:  Cell Commun Signal       Date:  2020-04-07       Impact factor: 5.712

10.  MethylNet: an automated and modular deep learning approach for DNA methylation analysis.

Authors:  Joshua J Levy; Alexander J Titus; Curtis L Petersen; Youdinghuan Chen; Lucas A Salas; Brock C Christensen
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.