Cited by 6,368Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsEpigenetics and DNA MethylationGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes

Open access
Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium, Kundaje, Anshul, Meuleman, Wouter, Ernst, Jason, Bilenky, Misha, Yen, Angela, Heravi-Moussavi, Alireza, Kheradpour, Pouya +88 more·2015·Nature

Abstract

The reference human genome sequence set the stage for studies of genetic variation and its association with human disease, but epigenomic studies lack a similar reference. To address this need, the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium generated the largest collection so far of human epigenomes for primary cells and tissues. Here we describe the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes generated as part of the programme, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression. We establish global maps of regulatory elements, define regulatory modules of coordinated activity, and their likely activators and repressors. We show that disease- and trait-associated genetic variants are enriched in tissue-specific epigenomic marks, revealing biologically relevant cell types for diverse human traits, and providing a resource for interpreting the molecular basis of human disease. Our results demonstrate the central role of epigenomic information for understanding gene regulation, cellular differentiation and human disease. This study describes the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression; the results annotate candidate regulatory elements in diverse tissues and cell types, their candidate regulators, and the set of human traits for which they show genetic variant enrichment, providing a resource for interpreting the molecular basis of human disease. The goal of the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium was to generate a reference collection of human epigenomes for primary cells and tissues. This study describes the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression. The results show that disease and trait-associated genetic variants are enriched in predicted tissue-specific epigenomic marks, revealing biologically relevant cell types for diverse human traits and providing a resource for interpreting the molecular basis of human disease.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature14248

Cites

123 of 123 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Processing of ChIP-seq and ATAC-seq reads adhered to ENCODE/Roadmap guidelines, with small changes.

    “The techniques described for processing the ChIP-seq and ATAC-seq reads are based on ENCODE/Roadmap guidelines with a few modifications (Gjoneska et al., 2015; Landt et al., 2012; Roadmap Epigenomics et al., 2015).”

    From Loss of epigenetic information as a cause of mammalian aging (2023) · cites this paper as Roadmap Epigenomics et al., 2015

    Online Methods §1.2 describes the Roadmap consortium’s ChIP-seq read-mapping and processing procedures, supporting its use as a reference for ChIP-seq processing. That section covers ChIP-seq and DNase-seq, not ATAC-seq; the paper also cannot establish whether the citing authors followed those procedures with only a few modifications. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Genic enhancers and transcribed regions are hotspots for oxidative DNA damage (EnhG1 0.391, EnhG2 0.392, Tx 0.378, TxWk 0.367).

    “Similar to the results above, genic enhancers (average RPKM, EnhG1: 0.391 and EnhG2: 0.392) and transcribed regions (average RPKM, Tx: 0.378 and TxWk: 0.367) are hotspots for oxidative DNA damage (Fig. 2b).”

    From Single-cell parallel analysis of DNA damage and transcriptome reveals selective genome vulnerability (2025) · cites this paper as [49]

    The Extended Data passages identify EnhG1 and EnhG2 as enhancer states and Tx and TxWk as chromatin states. They do not report oxidative DNA damage hotspots or the four average RPKM values. Searches for oxidative DNA damage and those values found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • aSNPs are generally depleted from inactive chromatin states, promoters and transcription start sites, but enriched within transcribed and subsets of enhancer elements.

    “aSNPs are generally depleted from inactive chromatin states (states not associated with gene expression as defined by [34]) as well as promoters and transcription start sites, but enriched within transcribed and subsets of enhancer elements (Fig 1; full results are available at S5 Table).”
  • The analyses considered variants across multiple cell types and functional chromatin states to account for the strong dependency on the cells' chromatin landscapes when assessing the potential activities of introgressed alleles.

    “We specifically analysed all of our variants across multiple cell types and functional chromatin states aiming to account for the strong dependency on the cells’ chromatin landscapes [34] when assessing the potential activities of introgressed alleles.”
  • DNase-seq and ChIP-seq from ENCODE and the Epigenomics Roadmap and pseudo-bulk single-cell ATAC-seq from CATlas focus the model towards distal regulatory elements.

    “as well as DNase-seq and ChIP–seq from ENCODE and the Epigenomics Roadmap31,99 and pseudo-bulk single-cell ATAC–seq data from CATlas100,101, which focuses the model towards distal regulatory elements.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 124 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium, Kundaje, A., Meuleman, W., Ernst, J., Bilenky, M., Yen, A., Heravi-Moussavi, A., Kheradpour, P., Zhang, Z., Wang, J., Ziller, M. J., Amin, V., Whitaker, J. W., Schultz, M. D., Ward, L. D., Sarkar, A., Quon, G., Sandstrom, R. S., Eaton, M. L., Wu, Y.-C., Pfenning, A. R., Wang, X., Claussnitzer, M., Liu, Y., Coarfa, C., Harris, R. A., Shoresh, N., Epstein, C. B., Gjoneska, E., Leung, D., Xie, W., Hawkins, R. D., Lister, R., Hong, C., Gascard, P., Mungall, A. J., Moore, R., Chuah, E., Tam, A., Canfield, T. K., Hansen, R. S., Kaul, R., Sabo, P. J., Bansal, M. S., Carles, A., Dixon, J. R., Farh, K.-H., Feizi, S., Karlic, R., Kim, A.-R., Kulkarni, A., Li, D., Lowdon, R., Elliott, G., Mercer, T. R., Neph, S. J., Onuchic, V., Polak, P., Rajagopal, N., Ray, P., Sallari, R. C., Siebenthall, K. T., Sinnott-Armstrong, N. A., Stevens, M., Thurman, R. E., Wu, J., Zhang, B., Zhou, X., Beaudet, A. E., Boyer, L. A., De Jager, P. L., Farnham, P. J., Fisher, S. J., Haussler, D., Jones, S. J. M., Li, W., Marra, M. A., McManus, M. T., Sunyaev, S., Thomson, J. A., Tlsty, T. D., Tsai, L.-H., Wang, W., Waterland, R. A., Zhang, M. Q., Chadwick, L. H., Bernstein, B. E., Costello, J. F., Ecker, J. R., Hirst, M., Meissner, A., Milosavljevic, A., Ren, B., Stamatoyannopoulos, J. A., Wang, T., & Kellis, M.
Affiliations
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • BC Cancer Agency (CA)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Salk Institute for Biological Studies (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • The University of Texas at Dallas (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Kellis, Manolis
Venue
Nature
Published
2015-02-18
Volume
518
Issue
7539
Pages
317-330
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2076154138
Cited by
6,368
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 329 · 2025: 429 · 2024: 495 · 2023: 564 · 2022: 589 · 2021: 676 · 2020: 678 · 2019: 644 · 2018: 628 · 2017: 560 · 2016: 517 · 2015: 246 · 2014: 6
FWCI
280.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Institutional Repository (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (submittedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • PMC
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1254200, CAREER)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Washington University in St. Louis
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (91019016)
  • Tsinghua University (100084)
  • Tsinghua National Laboratory for Information Science and Technology
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG017917, U01AG046152, R01AG015819, P30AG010161, RF1AG015819, RF1AG036042)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R00HL119617, K99HL119617, F32HL110473)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH096890)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (U01DA025956, R25DA027995, P01DA008227)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG007175, R01HG007354, RC1HG005334, R01HG004037, U54HG007990)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007266, T32GM081739, T32GM007198)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U54DK106829)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS078839)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (U01ES017166, R01ES024992, U01ES017156, ES017166, R01ES024984, U01ES017155, T32ES007032, U01ES017154)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD092419, R24HD000836)
  • Common Fund
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
human epigenome, histone modifications, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation, RNA expression, regulatory elements, disease-associated variants, gene expression regulation, cell differentiation
MeSH terms
Base Sequence, Cells, Cultured, Chromatin, Chromosomes, Human, DNA, Enhancer Elements, Genetic, Histones, Humans, Organ Specificity, Reference Values, RNA, Genetic Variation, Genome, Human, Cell Lineage, DNA Methylation, Epigenesis, Genetic, Genome-Wide Association Study, Epigenomics, Datasets as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review