Analysis Overview
Skin Cutaneous Melanoma (Metastatic)
15 January 2014  |  analyses__2014_01_15
Maintainer Information
Citation Information
doi:10.7908/C1WW7G4B
Maintained by TCGA GDAC Team (Broad Institute/MD Anderson Cancer Center/Harvard Medical School)
Cite as Broad Institute TCGA Genome Data Analysis Center (2014): Analysis Overview for Skin Cutaneous Melanoma (Metastatic cohort) - 15 January 2014. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. doi:10.7908/C1WW7G4B
Overview
Introduction

This is an overview of Skin Cutaneous Melanoma analysis pipelines from Firehose run "15 January 2014".

Summary

Note: These results are offered to the community as an additional reference point, enabling a wide range of cancer biologists, clinical investigators, and genome and computational scientists to easily incorporate TCGA into the backdrop of ongoing research. While every effort is made to ensure that Firehose input data and algorithms are of the highest possible quality, these analyses have not been reviewed by domain experts.

Results

  • Sequence and Copy Number Analyses

    • LowPass Copy number analysis (GISTIC2)
      View Report | There were 103 tumor samples used in this analysis: 20 significant arm-level results, 8 significant focal amplifications, and 6 significant focal deletions were found.

    • Mutation Analysis (MutSig v1.5)
      View Report | 

    • Mutation Analysis (MutSig v2.0 and MutSigCV v0.9 merged result)
      View Report | 

    • Mutation Analysis (MutSig v2.0)
      View Report | 

    • Mutation Analysis (MutSigCV v0.9)
      View Report | 

    • Mutation Assessor
      View Report | 

    • SNP6 Copy number analysis (GISTIC2)
      View Report | There were 292 tumor samples used in this analysis: 21 significant arm-level results, 23 significant focal amplifications, and 29 significant focal deletions were found.

  • Correlations to Clinical Parameters

    • Correlation between aggregated molecular cancer subtypes and selected clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between subtypes identified by 10 different clustering approaches and 12 clinical features across 260 patients, 9 significant findings detected with P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between copy number variation genes (focal events) and selected clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between copy number variation 52 focal events and 12 clinical features across 260 patients, 2 significant findings detected with Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between copy number variations of arm-level result and selected clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between copy number variation 79 arm-level events and 12 clinical features across 260 patients, 2 significant findings detected with Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between gene methylation status and clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between 19685 genes and 12 clinical features across 260 samples, statistically thresholded by Q value < 0.05, 7 clinical features related to at least one genes.

    • Correlation between gene mutation status and selected clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between mutation status of 168 genes and 12 clinical features across 254 patients, 4 significant findings detected with Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between miRseq expression and clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between 598 miRs and 12 clinical features across 251 samples, statistically thresholded by Q value < 0.05, 4 clinical features related to at least one miRs.

    • Correlation between mRNAseq expression and clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between 18086 genes and 12 clinical features across 258 samples, statistically thresholded by Q value < 0.05, 7 clinical features related to at least one genes.

    • Correlation between RPPA expression and clinical features
      View Report | Testing the association between 181 genes and 12 clinical features across 164 samples, statistically thresholded by Q value < 0.05, 3 clinical features related to at least one genes.

  • Clustering Analyses

    • Clustering of copy number data by focal peak region with log2 ratio: consensus NMF
      View Report | The most robust consensus NMF clustering of 292 samples using the 52 copy number focal regions was identified for k = 3 clusters. We computed the clustering for k = 2 to k = 8 and used the cophenetic correlation coefficient to determine the best solution.

    • Clustering of copy number data by peak region with threshold value: consensus NMF
      View Report | The most robust consensus NMF clustering of 292 samples using the 52 copy number focal regions was identified for k = 6 clusters. We computed the clustering for k = 2 to k = 8 and used the cophenetic correlation coefficient to determine the best solution.

    • Clustering of Methylation: consensus NMF
      View Report | The 11484 most variable methylated genes were selected based on variation. The variation cutoff are set for each tumor type empirically by fitting a bimodal distriution. For genes with multiple methylation probes, we chose the most variable one to represent the gene. Consensus NMF clustering of 292 samples and 11484 genes identified 3 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of miRseq mature expression: consensus hierarchical
      View Report | We filtered the data to 256 most variable miRs. Consensus average linkage hierarchical clustering of 273 samples and 256 miRs identified 4 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of miRseq mature expression: consensus NMF
      View Report | We filtered the data to 256 most variable miRs. Consensus NMF clustering of 273 samples and 256 miRs identified 3 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of miRseq precursor expression: consensus hierarchical
      View Report | We filtered the data to 150 most variable miRs. Consensus average linkage hierarchical clustering of 273 samples and 150 miRs identified 4 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of miRseq precursor expression: consensus NMF
      View Report | We filtered the data to 150 most variable miRs. Consensus NMF clustering of 273 samples and 150 miRs identified 3 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of mRNAseq gene expression: consensus hierarchical
      View Report | The 1500 most variable genes were selected. Consensus average linkage hierarchical clustering of 283 samples and 1500 genes identified 3 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of mRNAseq gene expression: consensus NMF
      View Report | The most robust consensus NMF clustering of 283 samples using the 1500 most variable genes was identified for k = 3 clusters. We computed the clustering for k = 2 to k = 8 and used the cophenetic correlation coefficient to determine the best solution.

    • Clustering of RPPA data: consensus hierarchical
      View Report | 181 proteins were selected. Consensus average linkage hierarchical clustering of 170 samples and 181 proteins identified 3 subtypes with the stability of the clustering increasing for k = 2 to k = 8 and the average silhouette width calculation for selecting the robust clusters.

    • Clustering of RPPA data: consensus NMF
      View Report | The most robust consensus NMF clustering of 170 samples using 181 proteins was identified for k = 4 clusters. We computed the clustering for k = 2 to k = 8 and used the cophenetic correlation coefficient to determine the best solution.

  • Pathway Analyses

    • HotNet pathway analysis of mutation and copy number data
      View Report | There were 34 significant subnetworks identified in HotNet analysis.

    • PARADIGM pathway analysis of mRNASeq expression and copy number data
      View Report | There were 63 significant pathways identified in this analysis.

    • PARADIGM pathway analysis of mRNASeq expression data
      View Report | There were 63 significant pathways identified in this analysis.

  • Other Correlation Analyses

    • Correlation between copy number variation genes (focal events) and molecular subtypes
      View Report | Testing the association between copy number variation 40 focal events and 10 molecular subtypes across 292 patients, 25 significant findings detected with P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between copy number variations of arm-level result and molecular subtypes
      View Report | Testing the association between copy number variation 79 arm-level events and 10 molecular subtypes across 292 patients, 26 significant findings detected with P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between gene mutation status and molecular subtypes
      View Report | Testing the association between mutation status of 169 genes and 10 molecular subtypes across 279 patients, 3 significant findings detected with P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25.

    • Correlation between mRNA expression and DNA methylation
      View Report | The top 25 correlated methylation probes per gene are displayed. Total number of matched samples = 283. Number of gene expression samples = 283. Number of methylation samples = 292.

    • Correlations between copy number and mRNAseq expression
      View Report | The correlation coefficients in 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 percentiles are 977.4, 1627, 2180, 2749.6, 3354, 3967, 4605, 5301, 6056.6, respectively.

Methods & Data
Input

  • Summary Report Date = Fri Feb 28 12:57:02 2014

  • Protection = FALSE

Copyright © 2014 Broad Institute TCGA GDAC as part of the TCGA Research Network. All rights reserved.
Made with Nozzle