Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 601

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genome-scale analysis of aberrant DNA methylation in colorectal cancer

Open access
Hinoue, Toshinori, Weisenberger, Daniel J., Lange, Christopher P.E., Shen, Hui, Byun, Hyang-Min, Van Den Berg, David, Malik, Simeen, Pan, Fei, Noushmehr, Houtan, van Dijk, Cornelis M., Tollenaar, Rob A.E.M., Laird, Peter W.·2012·Genome Research

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease in which unique subtypes are characterized by distinct genetic and epigenetic alterations. Here we performed comprehensive genome-scale DNA methylation profiling of 125 colorectal tumors and 29 adjacent normal tissues. We identified four DNA methylation–based subgroups of CRC using model-based cluster analyses. Each subtype shows characteristic genetic and clinical features, indicating that they represent biologically distinct subgroups. A CIMP-high (CIMP-H) subgroup, which exhibits an exceptionally high frequency of cancer-specific DNA hypermethylation, is strongly associated with MLH1 DNA hypermethylation and the BRAF V600E mutation. A CIMP-low (CIMP-L) subgroup is enriched for KRAS mutations and characterized by DNA hypermethylation of a subset of CIMP-H-associated markers rather than a unique group of CpG islands. Non-CIMP tumors are separated into two distinct clusters. One non-CIMP subgroup is distinguished by a significantly higher frequency of TP53 mutations and frequent occurrence in the distal colon, while the tumors that belong to the fourth group exhibit a low frequency of both cancer-specific DNA hypermethylation and gene mutations and are significantly enriched for rectal tumors. Furthermore, we identified 112 genes that were down-regulated more than twofold in CIMP-H tumors together with promoter DNA hypermethylation. These represent ∼7% of genes that acquired promoter DNA methylation in CIMP-H tumors. Intriguingly, 48/112 genes were also transcriptionally down-regulated in non-CIMP subgroups, but this was not attributable to promoter DNA hypermethylation. Together, we identified four distinct DNA methylation subgroups of CRC and provided novel insight regarding the role of CIMP-specific DNA hypermethylation in gene silencing.

Overview

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 · 10.1101/gr.117523.110

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 52 references

Cited by

See all 601

Metadata

Authors
Hinoue, T., Weisenberger, D. J., Lange, C. P. E., Shen, H., Byun, H.-M., Van Den Berg, D., Malik, S., Pan, F., Noushmehr, H., van Dijk, C. M., Tollenaar, R. A. E. M., & Laird, P. W.
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2011-06-09
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
271-282
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7221143472
Cited by
601
References
52
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genome-scale analysis of aberrant DNA methylation in colorectal cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.117523.110
The paper
Hinoue, T., Weisenberger, D. J., Lange, C. P. E., Shen, H., Byun, H.-M., Van Den Berg, D., Malik, S., Pan, F., Noushmehr, H., van Dijk, C. M., Tollenaar, R. A. E. M., & Laird, P. W. (2012). Genome-scale analysis of aberrant DNA methylation in colorectal cancer. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.117523.110

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.