MethMarker: user-friendly design and optimization of gene-specific DNA methylation assays.

Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Saarbrücken, Germany.
Genome biology (Impact Factor: 10.3). 10/2009; 10(10):R105. DOI: 10.1186/gb-2009-10-10-r105
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT DNA methylation is a key mechanism of epigenetic regulation that is frequently altered in diseases such as cancer. To confirm the biological or clinical relevance of such changes, gene-specific DNA methylation changes need to be validated in multiple samples. We have developed the MethMarker software to help design robust and cost-efficient DNA methylation assays for six widely used methods. Furthermore, MethMarker implements a bioinformatic workflow for transforming disease-specific differentially methylated genomic regions into robust clinical biomarkers.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: DNA methylation is an epigenetic mark that has suspected regulatory roles in a broad range of biological processes and diseases. The technology is now available for studying DNA methylation genome-wide, at a high resolution and in a large number of samples. This Review discusses relevant concepts, computational methods and software tools for analysing and interpreting DNA methylation data. It focuses not only on the bioinformatic challenges of large epigenome-mapping projects and epigenome-wide association studies but also highlights software tools that make genome-wide DNA methylation mapping more accessible for laboratories with limited bioinformatics experience.
    Nature Reviews Genetics 09/2012; 13(10):705-19. · 41.06 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of next generation sequencing has expanded our view on whole mammalian methylome patterns. In particular, it provides a genome-wide insight of local DNA methylation diversity at single nucleotide level and enables the examination of single chromosome sequence sections at a sufficient statistical power. We describe a bisulfite-based sequence profiling pipeline, Bi-PROF, which is based on the 454 GS-FLX Titanium technology that allows to obtain up to one million sequence stretches at single base pair resolution without laborious subcloning. To illustrate the performance of the experimental workflow connected to a bioinformatics program pipeline (BiQ Analyzer HT) we present a test analysis set of 68 different epigenetic marker regions (amplicons) in five individual patient-derived xenograft tissue samples of colorectal cancer and one healthy colon epithelium sample as a control. After the 454 GS-FLX Titanium run, sequence read processing and sample decoding, the obtained alignments are quality controlled and statistically evaluated. Comprehensive methylation pattern interpretation (profiling) assessed by analyzing 10 ( 2) -10 ( 4) sequence reads per amplicon allows an unprecedented deep view on pattern formation and methylation marker heterogeneity in tissues concerned by complex diseases like cancer.
    Epigenetics: official journal of the DNA Methylation Society 06/2013; 8(7). · 4.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and the 5-year survival rate is still very poor due to the scarcity of effective tools for early detection. The discovery of highly sensitive and specific biomarkers highlighting pathological changes early enough to allow clinical intervention is therefore of great importance. In the last decade, epigenetics and particularly research on DNA methylation have provided important information towards a better understanding of lung cancer pathogenesis. Novel and promising molecular biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of lung cancer are continuously emerging in this area, requiring further evaluation. This process includes extensive validation in prospective clinical trials before they can be routinely used in a clinical setting. This review summarizes the evidence on epigenetic biomarkers for lung cancer, focusing on DNA methylation.
    Biomarkers in Medicine 02/2013; 7(1):49-58. · 3.22 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
Jun 4, 2014

Peter J. Schüffler