Correlation between copy number variation genes (focal events) and selected clinical features
Kidney Chromophobe (Primary solid tumor)
15 January 2014  |  analyses__2014_01_15
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 (2014): Correlation between copy number variation genes (focal events) and selected clinical features. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. doi:10.7908/C1V986GQ
Overview
Introduction

This pipeline computes the correlation between significant copy number variation (cnv focal) genes and selected clinical features.

Summary

Testing the association between copy number variation 2 focal events and 10 clinical features across 66 patients, one significant finding detected with Q value < 0.25.

  • amp_8q11.23 cnv correlated to 'YEAROFTOBACCOSMOKINGONSET'.

Results
Overview of the results

Table 1.  Get Full Table Overview of the association between significant copy number variation of 2 focal events and 10 clinical features. Shown in the table are P values (Q values). Thresholded by Q value < 0.25, one significant finding detected.

Clinical
Features
Time
to
Death
AGE NEOPLASM
DISEASESTAGE
PATHOLOGY
T
STAGE
PATHOLOGY
N
STAGE
PATHOLOGY
M
STAGE
GENDER KARNOFSKY
PERFORMANCE
SCORE
NUMBERPACKYEARSSMOKED YEAROFTOBACCOSMOKINGONSET
nCNV (%) nWild-Type logrank test t-test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test t-test t-test t-test
amp 8q11 23 19 (29%) 47 0.418
(1.00)
0.296
(1.00)
0.12
(1.00)
0.839
(1.00)
0.33
(1.00)
0.135
(1.00)
0.412
(1.00)
0.863
(1.00)
0.291
(1.00)
0.0084
(0.168)
amp 15q22 31 23 (35%) 43 0.0699
(1.00)
0.396
(1.00)
0.127
(1.00)
0.397
(1.00)
0.141
(1.00)
0.112
(1.00)
0.601
(1.00)
0.863
(1.00)
0.776
(1.00)
0.0341
(0.649)
'amp_8q11.23' versus 'YEAROFTOBACCOSMOKINGONSET'

P value = 0.0084 (t-test), Q value = 0.17

Table S1.  Gene #1: 'amp_8q11.23' versus Clinical Feature #10: 'YEAROFTOBACCOSMOKINGONSET'

nPatients Mean (Std.Dev)
ALL 8 1973.8 (15.4)
AMP PEAK 1(8Q11.23) MUTATED 3 1989.0 (7.0)
AMP PEAK 1(8Q11.23) WILD-TYPE 5 1964.6 (10.6)

Figure S1.  Get High-res Image Gene #1: 'amp_8q11.23' versus Clinical Feature #10: 'YEAROFTOBACCOSMOKINGONSET'

Methods & Data
Input
  • Copy number data file = transformed.cor.cli.txt

  • Clinical data file = KICH-TP.merged_data.txt

  • Number of patients = 66

  • Number of significantly focal cnvs = 2

  • Number of selected clinical features = 10

  • 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

In addition to the links below, the full results of the analysis summarized in this report can also be downloaded programmatically using firehose_get, or interactively from either the Broad GDAC website or TCGA Data Coordination Center Portal.

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)