Correlation between copy number variations of arm-level result and molecular subtypes
Acute Myeloid Leukemia (Primary blood derived cancer - Peripheral blood)
15 January 2014  |  analyses__2014_01_15
Maintainer Information
Citation Information
doi:10.7908/C1Q23XPJ
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 variations of arm-level result and molecular subtypes. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. doi:10.7908/C1Q23XPJ
Overview
Introduction

This pipeline computes the correlation between significant arm-level copy number variations (cnvs) and molecular subtypes.

Summary

Testing the association between copy number variation 30 arm-level events and 6 molecular subtypes across 191 patients, 26 significant findings detected with P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25.

  • 8p gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF' and 'METHLYATION_CNMF'.

  • 8q gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF' and 'METHLYATION_CNMF'.

  • 11p gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 11q gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 19p gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 19q gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 21q gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 22q gain cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 5q loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 7p loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF',  'METHLYATION_CNMF',  'MRNASEQ_CNMF',  'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL', and 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'.

  • 7q loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF',  'METHLYATION_CNMF', and 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'.

  • 15q loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 16q loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 17p loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 17q loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 18p loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • 18q loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

  • xq loss cnv correlated to 'CN_CNMF'.

Results
Overview of the results

Table 1.  Get Full Table Overview of the association between significant copy number variation of 30 arm-level events and 6 molecular subtypes. Shown in the table are P values (Q values). Thresholded by P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25, 26 significant findings detected.

Clinical
Features 		CN
CNMF 		METHLYATION
CNMF 		MRNASEQ
CNMF 		MRNASEQ
CHIERARCHICAL 		MIRSEQ
CNMF 		MIRSEQ
CHIERARCHICAL
nCNV (%) nWild-Type Fisher's exact test Chi-square test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test
7p loss 17 (9%) 174 4.46e-05
(0.00758) 		0.000252
(0.0416) 		0.000852
(0.135) 		0.00141
(0.219) 		0.00382
(0.561) 		0.000194
(0.0322)
7q loss 20 (10%) 171 3.95e-06
(0.000691) 		1.14e-05
(0.00196) 		0.00641
(0.885) 		0.0125
(1.00) 		0.00168
(0.254) 		7.26e-05
(0.0123)
8p gain 22 (12%) 169 0.000968
(0.152) 		0.000303
(0.0498) 		0.0274
(1.00) 		0.00695
(0.953) 		0.0109
(1.00) 		0.0972
(1.00)
8q gain 23 (12%) 168 0.00162
(0.247) 		0.000904
(0.143) 		0.0138
(1.00) 		0.00397
(0.579) 		0.00745
(1.00) 		0.114
(1.00)
11p gain 4 (2%) 187 0.000687
(0.111) 		0.0808
(1.00) 		0.467
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.523
(1.00) 		0.0704
(1.00)
11q gain 7 (4%) 184 8.12e-06
(0.00141) 		0.00516
(0.733) 		0.0668
(1.00) 		0.425
(1.00) 		0.291
(1.00) 		0.271
(1.00)
19p gain 5 (3%) 186 0.000749
(0.121) 		0.633
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.578
(1.00) 		1
(1.00)
19q gain 5 (3%) 186 0.000749
(0.121) 		0.633
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.578
(1.00) 		1
(1.00)
21q gain 8 (4%) 183 3.41e-07
(6e-05) 		0.203
(1.00) 		0.124
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.0814
(1.00) 		0.198
(1.00)
22q gain 9 (5%) 182 0.00109
(0.17) 		0.00832
(1.00) 		0.136
(1.00) 		0.275
(1.00) 		0.0556
(1.00) 		0.147
(1.00)
5q loss 6 (3%) 185 3.23e-05
(0.00552) 		0.0134
(1.00) 		0.224
(1.00) 		0.664
(1.00) 		0.0318
(1.00) 		0.0205
(1.00)
15q loss 4 (2%) 187 0.000504
(0.0821) 		0.654
(1.00) 		0.066
(1.00) 		0.301
(1.00) 		0.0228
(1.00) 		0.0116
(1.00)
16q loss 4 (2%) 187 0.00151
(0.232) 		0.0808
(1.00) 		0.786
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.0147
(1.00) 		0.0116
(1.00)
17p loss 13 (7%) 178 1.97e-12
(3.48e-10) 		0.00581
(0.813) 		0.151
(1.00) 		0.0624
(1.00) 		0.16
(1.00) 		0.00532
(0.751)
17q loss 7 (4%) 184 5.11e-06
(0.00089) 		0.201
(1.00) 		0.0668
(1.00) 		0.425
(1.00) 		0.0385
(1.00) 		0.00633
(0.88)
18p loss 5 (3%) 186 0.000142
(0.0237) 		0.0335
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.248
(1.00) 		0.329
(1.00)
18q loss 4 (2%) 187 0.00151
(0.232) 		0.0808
(1.00) 		0.467
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.101
(1.00) 		0.0704
(1.00)
xq loss 5 (3%) 186 0.000101
(0.017) 		0.15
(1.00) 		0.224
(1.00) 		0.664
(1.00) 		0.00335
(0.496) 		0.00258
(0.386)
1p gain 3 (2%) 188 0.00511
(0.731) 		0.185
(1.00) 		0.186
(1.00) 		0.552
(1.00) 		0.0923
(1.00) 		0.0481
(1.00)
4p gain 4 (2%) 187 0.0259
(1.00) 		0.0502
(1.00) 		0.55
(1.00) 		0.343
(1.00) 		0.831
(1.00)
4q gain 4 (2%) 187 0.0259
(1.00) 		0.0502
(1.00) 		0.55
(1.00) 		0.343
(1.00) 		0.831
(1.00)
10q gain 3 (2%) 188 0.012
(1.00) 		0.185
(1.00) 		0.186
(1.00) 		0.552
(1.00) 		0.552
(1.00) 		0.222
(1.00)
13q gain 6 (3%) 185 0.0333
(1.00) 		0.0134
(1.00) 		0.124
(1.00) 		0.0978
(1.00) 		0.8
(1.00) 		0.25
(1.00)
17q gain 3 (2%) 188 0.00767
(1.00) 		0.38
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.552
(1.00) 		0.482
(1.00) 		0.222
(1.00)
xq gain 3 (2%) 188 0.00296
(0.442) 		0.658
(1.00) 		0.55
(1.00) 		0.891
(1.00) 		0.787
(1.00)
3p loss 3 (2%) 188 0.00767
(1.00) 		0.185
(1.00) 		0.786
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.0618
(1.00) 		0.0481
(1.00)
3q loss 3 (2%) 188 0.00767
(1.00) 		0.185
(1.00) 		0.786
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.0618
(1.00) 		0.0481
(1.00)
12p loss 4 (2%) 187 0.00809
(1.00) 		0.0759
(1.00) 		0.374
(1.00) 		0.301
(1.00) 		0.483
(1.00) 		0.0704
(1.00)
19p loss 4 (2%) 187 0.00421
(0.611) 		0.411
(1.00) 		0.467
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.311
(1.00) 		0.144
(1.00)
19q loss 4 (2%) 187 0.00421
(0.611) 		0.411
(1.00) 		0.467
(1.00) 		1
(1.00) 		0.311
(1.00) 		0.144
(1.00)
'8p gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000968 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.15

Table S1.  Gene #4: '8p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
8P GAIN MUTATED 11 1 10 0
8P GAIN WILD-TYPE 136 13 17 3

Figure S1.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: '8p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'8p gain' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.000303 (Chi-square test), Q value = 0.05

Table S2.  Gene #4: '8p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 46 44 61 14 20
8P GAIN MUTATED 2 1 16 0 2
8P GAIN WILD-TYPE 44 43 45 14 18

Figure S2.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: '8p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

'8q gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.00162 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.25

Table S3.  Gene #5: '8q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
8Q GAIN MUTATED 12 1 10 0
8Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 135 13 17 3

Figure S3.  Get High-res Image Gene #5: '8q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'8q gain' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.000904 (Chi-square test), Q value = 0.14

Table S4.  Gene #5: '8q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 46 44 61 14 20
8Q GAIN MUTATED 2 2 16 0 2
8Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 44 42 45 14 18

Figure S4.  Get High-res Image Gene #5: '8q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

'11p gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000687 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.11

Table S5.  Gene #7: '11p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
11P GAIN MUTATED 0 3 1 0
11P GAIN WILD-TYPE 147 11 26 3

Figure S5.  Get High-res Image Gene #7: '11p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'11q gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 8.12e-06 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.0014

Table S6.  Gene #8: '11q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
11Q GAIN MUTATED 0 4 3 0
11Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 147 10 24 3

Figure S6.  Get High-res Image Gene #8: '11q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'19p gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000749 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.12

Table S7.  Gene #11: '19p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
19P GAIN MUTATED 0 1 4 0
19P GAIN WILD-TYPE 147 13 23 3

Figure S7.  Get High-res Image Gene #11: '19p gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'19q gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000749 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.12

Table S8.  Gene #12: '19q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
19Q GAIN MUTATED 0 1 4 0
19Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 147 13 23 3

Figure S8.  Get High-res Image Gene #12: '19q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'21q gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 3.41e-07 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 6e-05

Table S9.  Gene #13: '21q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
21Q GAIN MUTATED 0 0 8 0
21Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 147 14 19 3

Figure S9.  Get High-res Image Gene #13: '21q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'22q gain' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.00109 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.17

Table S10.  Gene #14: '22q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
22Q GAIN MUTATED 2 2 5 0
22Q GAIN WILD-TYPE 145 12 22 3

Figure S10.  Get High-res Image Gene #14: '22q gain' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'5q loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 3.23e-05 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.0055

Table S11.  Gene #18: '5q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
5Q LOSS MUTATED 0 0 6 0
5Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 21 3

Figure S11.  Get High-res Image Gene #18: '5q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'7p loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 4.46e-05 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.0076

Table S12.  Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
7P LOSS MUTATED 7 0 8 2
7P LOSS WILD-TYPE 140 14 19 1

Figure S12.  Get High-res Image Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'7p loss' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.000252 (Chi-square test), Q value = 0.042

Table S13.  Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 46 44 61 14 20
7P LOSS MUTATED 1 0 14 1 1
7P LOSS WILD-TYPE 45 44 47 13 19

Figure S13.  Get High-res Image Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

'7p loss' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.000852 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.14

Table S14.  Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 70 52 44
7P LOSS MUTATED 13 0 3
7P LOSS WILD-TYPE 57 52 41

Figure S14.  Get High-res Image Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

'7p loss' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.00141 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.22

Table S15.  Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2
ALL 56 110
7P LOSS MUTATED 0 16
7P LOSS WILD-TYPE 56 94

Figure S15.  Get High-res Image Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

'7p loss' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.000194 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.032

Table S16.  Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 35 79 65
7P LOSS MUTATED 10 2 5
7P LOSS WILD-TYPE 25 77 60

Figure S16.  Get High-res Image Gene #19: '7p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

'7q loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 3.95e-06 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.00069

Table S17.  Gene #20: '7q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
7Q LOSS MUTATED 8 0 10 2
7Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 139 14 17 1

Figure S17.  Get High-res Image Gene #20: '7q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'7q loss' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 1.14e-05 (Chi-square test), Q value = 0.002

Table S18.  Gene #20: '7q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 46 44 61 14 20
7Q LOSS MUTATED 1 0 17 1 1
7Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 45 44 44 13 19

Figure S18.  Get High-res Image Gene #20: '7q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

'7q loss' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 7.26e-05 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.012

Table S19.  Gene #20: '7q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 35 79 65
7Q LOSS MUTATED 11 2 6
7Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 24 77 59

Figure S19.  Get High-res Image Gene #20: '7q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

'15q loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000504 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.082

Table S20.  Gene #22: '15q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
15Q LOSS MUTATED 0 0 3 1
15Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 24 2

Figure S20.  Get High-res Image Gene #22: '15q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'16q loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.00151 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.23

Table S21.  Gene #23: '16q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
16Q LOSS MUTATED 0 0 4 0
16Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 23 3

Figure S21.  Get High-res Image Gene #23: '16q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'17p loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 1.97e-12 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 3.5e-10

Table S22.  Gene #24: '17p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
17P LOSS MUTATED 0 0 13 0
17P LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 14 3

Figure S22.  Get High-res Image Gene #24: '17p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'17q loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 5.11e-06 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.00089

Table S23.  Gene #25: '17q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
17Q LOSS MUTATED 0 0 7 0
17Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 20 3

Figure S23.  Get High-res Image Gene #25: '17q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'18p loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000142 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.024

Table S24.  Gene #26: '18p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
18P LOSS MUTATED 0 0 5 0
18P LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 22 3

Figure S24.  Get High-res Image Gene #26: '18p loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'18q loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.00151 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.23

Table S25.  Gene #27: '18q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
18Q LOSS MUTATED 0 0 4 0
18Q LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 23 3

Figure S25.  Get High-res Image Gene #27: '18q loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'xq loss' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.000101 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.017

Table S26.  Gene #30: 'xq loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 147 14 27 3
XQ LOSS MUTATED 0 0 4 1
XQ LOSS WILD-TYPE 147 14 23 2

Figure S26.  Get High-res Image Gene #30: 'xq loss' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

Methods & Data
Input

  • Copy number data file = transformed.cor.cli.txt

  • Molecular subtypes file = LAML-TB.transferedmergedcluster.txt

  • Number of patients = 191

  • Number of significantly arm-level cnvs = 30

  • Number of molecular subtypes = 6

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

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

Chi-square test

For multi-class clinical features (nominal or ordinal), Chi-square tests (Greenwood and Nikulin 1996) were used to estimate the P values using the 'chisq.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] 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)
[2] Greenwood and Nikulin, A guide to chi-squared testing, Wiley, New York. ISBN 047155779X (1996)
[3] 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)
Copyright © 2014 Broad Institute TCGA GDAC as part of the TCGA Research Network. All rights reserved.
Made with Nozzle