Correlation between copy number variations of arm-level result and selected clinical features
Prostate Adenocarcinoma (Primary solid tumor)
21 April 2013  |  analyses__2013_04_21
Maintainer Information
Citation Information
Maintained by TCGA GDAC Team (Broad Institute/MD Anderson Cancer Center/Harvard Medical School)
Cite as Broad Institute TCGA Genome Data Analysis Center (2013): Prostate Adenocarcinoma (Primary solid tumor cohort) - 21 April 2013: Correlation between copy number variations of arm-level result and selected clinical features. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. doi:10.7908/C1JD4TRG
Overview
Introduction

This pipeline computes the correlation between significant arm-level copy number variations (cnvs) and selected clinical features.

Summary

Testing the association between copy number variation 25 arm-level results and 5 clinical features across 154 patients, 4 significant findings detected with Q value < 0.25.

  • 1q gain cnv correlated to 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'.

  • 3p gain cnv correlated to 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'.

  • 5q loss cnv correlated to 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'.

  • 20p loss cnv correlated to 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'.

Results
Overview of the results

Table 1.  Get Full Table Overview of the association between significant copy number variation of 25 arm-level results and 5 clinical features. Shown in the table are P values (Q values). Thresholded by Q value < 0.25, 4 significant findings detected.

Clinical
Features
Time
to
Death
AGE RADIATIONS
RADIATION
REGIMENINDICATION
COMPLETENESS
OF
RESECTION
NUMBER
OF
LYMPH
NODES
nCNV (%) nWild-Type logrank test t-test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test t-test
1q gain 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.302
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.228
(1.00)
0.00151
(0.187)
3p gain 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.648
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.604
(1.00)
0.00151
(0.187)
5q loss 0 (0%) 151 1
(1.00)
0.217
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.00151
(0.187)
20p loss 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.455
(1.00)
0.125
(1.00)
0.228
(1.00)
0.00151
(0.187)
3q gain 0 (0%) 149 1
(1.00)
0.362
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.439
(1.00)
7p gain 0 (0%) 140 1
(1.00)
0.0192
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.774
(1.00)
0.17
(1.00)
7q gain 0 (0%) 142 1
(1.00)
0.0695
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.958
(1.00)
8p gain 0 (0%) 147 1
(1.00)
0.636
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.405
(1.00)
0.685
(1.00)
8q gain 0 (0%) 140 1
(1.00)
0.694
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.427
(1.00)
0.856
(1.00)
9p gain 0 (0%) 151 1
(1.00)
0.725
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.555
(1.00)
9q gain 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.7
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.555
(1.00)
10q gain 0 (0%) 151 1
(1.00)
0.146
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.456
(1.00)
6q loss 0 (0%) 147 1
(1.00)
0.261
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.609
(1.00)
8p loss 0 (0%) 115 1
(1.00)
0.0895
(1.00)
0.331
(1.00)
0.495
(1.00)
0.0935
(1.00)
8q loss 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.651
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.248
(1.00)
10p loss 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.674
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.875
(1.00)
10q loss 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.395
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.604
(1.00)
0.328
(1.00)
12p loss 0 (0%) 147 1
(1.00)
0.671
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.405
(1.00)
0.142
(1.00)
13q loss 0 (0%) 143 1
(1.00)
0.819
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.1
(1.00)
16q loss 0 (0%) 134 1
(1.00)
0.286
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.638
(1.00)
0.207
(1.00)
17p loss 0 (0%) 135 1
(1.00)
0.464
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.517
(1.00)
0.129
(1.00)
18p loss 0 (0%) 140 1
(1.00)
0.861
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.544
(1.00)
0.487
(1.00)
18q loss 0 (0%) 134 1
(1.00)
0.72
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.517
(1.00)
0.242
(1.00)
21q loss 0 (0%) 151 1
(1.00)
0.405
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.503
(1.00)
22q loss 0 (0%) 150 1
(1.00)
0.467
(1.00)
0.125
(1.00)
0.228
(1.00)
0.511
(1.00)
'1q gain' versus 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

P value = 0.00151 (t-test), Q value = 0.19

Table S1.  Gene #1: '1q gain' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

nPatients Mean (Std.Dev)
ALL 135 0.2 (0.7)
1Q GAIN CNV 4 0.0 (0.0)
1Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 131 0.2 (0.8)

Figure S1.  Get High-res Image Gene #1: '1q gain' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

'3p gain' versus 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

P value = 0.00151 (t-test), Q value = 0.19

Table S2.  Gene #2: '3p gain' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

nPatients Mean (Std.Dev)
ALL 135 0.2 (0.7)
3P GAIN CNV 4 0.0 (0.0)
3P GAIN WILD-TYPE 131 0.2 (0.8)

Figure S2.  Get High-res Image Gene #2: '3p gain' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

'5q loss' versus 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

P value = 0.00151 (t-test), Q value = 0.19

Table S3.  Gene #11: '5q loss' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

nPatients Mean (Std.Dev)
ALL 135 0.2 (0.7)
5Q LOSS CNV 3 0.0 (0.0)
5Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 132 0.2 (0.8)

Figure S3.  Get High-res Image Gene #11: '5q loss' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

'20p loss' versus 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

P value = 0.00151 (t-test), Q value = 0.19

Table S4.  Gene #23: '20p loss' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

nPatients Mean (Std.Dev)
ALL 135 0.2 (0.7)
20P LOSS CNV 4 0.0 (0.0)
20P LOSS WILD-TYPE 131 0.2 (0.8)

Figure S4.  Get High-res Image Gene #23: '20p loss' versus Clinical Feature #5: 'NUMBER.OF.LYMPH.NODES'

Methods & Data
Input
  • Mutation data file = broad_values_by_arm.mutsig.cluster.txt

  • Clinical data file = PRAD-TP.clin.merged.picked.txt

  • Number of patients = 154

  • Number of significantly arm-level cnvs = 25

  • Number of selected clinical features = 5

  • Exclude genes that fewer than K tumors have mutations, K = 3

Survival analysis

For survival clinical features, the Kaplan-Meier survival curves of tumors with and without gene mutations were plotted and the statistical significance P values were estimated by logrank test (Bland and Altman 2004) using the 'survdiff' function in R

Student's t-test analysis

For continuous numerical clinical features, two-tailed Student's t test with unequal variance (Lehmann and Romano 2005) was applied to compare the clinical values between tumors with and without gene mutations using 't.test' function in R

Fisher's exact test

For binary or multi-class clinical features (nominal or ordinal), two-tailed Fisher's exact tests (Fisher 1922) were used to estimate the P values using the 'fisher.test' function in R

Q value calculation

For multiple hypothesis correction, Q value is the False Discovery Rate (FDR) analogue of the P value (Benjamini and Hochberg 1995), defined as the minimum FDR at which the test may be called significant. We used the 'Benjamini and Hochberg' method of 'p.adjust' function in R to convert P values into Q values.

Download Results

This is an experimental feature. The full results of the analysis summarized in this report can be downloaded from the TCGA Data Coordination Center.

References
[1] Bland and Altman, Statistics notes: The logrank test, BMJ 328(7447):1073 (2004)
[2] Lehmann and Romano, Testing Statistical Hypotheses (3E ed.), New York: Springer. ISBN 0387988645 (2005)
[3] Fisher, R.A., On the interpretation of chi-square from contingency tables, and the calculation of P, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 85(1):87-94 (1922)
[4] Benjamini and Hochberg, Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59:289-300 (1995)