Cited by 59Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Sensitive detection of chromatin-altering polymorphisms reveals autoimmune disease mechanisms

del Rosario, Ricardo Cruz-Herrera, Poschmann, Jeremie, Rouam, Sigrid Laure, Png, Eileen, Khor, Chiea Chuen, Hibberd, Martin Lloyd, Prabhakar, Shyam·2015·Nature Methods

Abstract

Most disease associations detected by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) lie outside coding genes, but very few have been mapped to causal regulatory variants. Here, we present a method for detecting regulatory quantitative trait loci (QTLs) that does not require genotyping or whole-genome sequencing. The method combines deep, long-read chromatin immunoprecipitation-sequencing (ChIP-seq) with a statistical test that simultaneously scores peak height correlation and allelic imbalance: the genotype-independent signal correlation and imbalance (G-SCI) test. We performed histone acetylation ChIP-seq on 57 human lymphoblastoid cell lines and used the resulting reads to call 500,066 single-nucleotide polymorphisms de novo within regulatory elements. The G-SCI test annotated 8,764 of these as histone acetylation QTLs (haQTLs)—an order of magnitude larger than the set of candidates detected by expression QTL analysis. Lymphoblastoid haQTLs were highly predictive of autoimmune disease mechanisms. Thus, our method facilitates large-scale regulatory variant detection in any moderately sized cohort for which functional profiling data can be generated, thereby simplifying identification of causal variants within GWAS loci.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nmeth.3326

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
del Rosario, R. C.-H., Poschmann, J., Rouam, S. L., Png, E., Khor, C. C., Hibberd, M. L., & Prabhakar, S.
Affiliations
  • Genome Institute of Singapore (SG)
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Prabhakar, Shyam
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2015-03-23
Volume
12
Issue
5
Pages
458-464
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W2144067586
Cited by
58
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
allelic imbalance, ChIP-seq, single nucleotide polymorphisms, lymphoblastoid cell lines, causal variant identification, epigenetic regulation
MeSH terms
Acetylation, Alleles, Cell Line, Gene Expression Regulation, Genetic Markers, Genotype, Histones, Humans, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Quantitative Trait Loci, Transcriptome

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