Correlation between gene mutation status and molecular subtypes
Adrenocortical Carcinoma (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 gene mutation status and molecular subtypes. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. doi:10.7908/C17M06D9
Overview
Introduction

This pipeline computes the correlation between significantly recurrent gene mutations and molecular subtypes.

Summary

Testing the association between mutation status of 9 genes and 8 molecular subtypes across 90 patients, 4 significant findings detected with P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25.

  • CTNNB1 mutation correlated to 'MRNASEQ_CNMF',  'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL', and 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'.

  • KRTAP4-5 mutation correlated to 'METHLYATION_CNMF'.

Results
Overview of the results

Table 1.  Get Full Table Overview of the association between mutation status of 9 genes and 8 molecular subtypes. Shown in the table are P values (Q values). Thresholded by P value < 0.05 and Q value < 0.25, 4 significant findings detected.

Clinical
Features
CN
CNMF
METHLYATION
CNMF
MRNASEQ
CNMF
MRNASEQ
CHIERARCHICAL
MIRSEQ
CNMF
MIRSEQ
CHIERARCHICAL
MIRSEQ
MATURE
CNMF
MIRSEQ
MATURE
CHIERARCHICAL
nMutated (%) nWild-Type Chi-square test Chi-square test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test Fisher's exact test
CTNNB1 13 (14%) 77 0.51
(1.00)
0.0755
(1.00)
0.000319
(0.0226)
0.000102
(0.00737)
0.000609
(0.0426)
0.541
(1.00)
0.00882
(0.582)
0.456
(1.00)
KRTAP4-5 4 (4%) 86 0.538
(1.00)
0.000785
(0.0541)
1
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.781
(1.00)
0.213
(1.00)
0.797
(1.00)
0.234
(1.00)
MUC5B 16 (18%) 74 0.134
(1.00)
0.207
(1.00)
0.218
(1.00)
0.364
(1.00)
0.167
(1.00)
0.409
(1.00)
0.393
(1.00)
0.465
(1.00)
CRIPAK 11 (12%) 79 0.0539
(1.00)
0.533
(1.00)
0.257
(1.00)
0.162
(1.00)
0.588
(1.00)
0.688
(1.00)
0.655
(1.00)
0.623
(1.00)
TP53 15 (17%) 75 0.00857
(0.574)
0.444
(1.00)
0.0122
(0.767)
0.0784
(1.00)
0.00968
(0.629)
0.087
(1.00)
0.0321
(1.00)
0.0377
(1.00)
MEN1 7 (8%) 83 0.427
(1.00)
0.0201
(1.00)
0.352
(1.00)
0.0698
(1.00)
0.666
(1.00)
0.514
(1.00)
0.771
(1.00)
0.536
(1.00)
PRKAR1A 6 (7%) 84 0.958
(1.00)
0.702
(1.00)
0.188
(1.00)
0.878
(1.00)
0.855
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.3
(1.00)
0.854
(1.00)
ATN1 4 (4%) 86 0.0602
(1.00)
0.657
(1.00)
0.877
(1.00)
1
(1.00)
0.781
(1.00)
0.691
(1.00)
0.797
(1.00)
0.709
(1.00)
DMKN 3 (3%) 87 0.693
(1.00)
0.344
(1.00)
0.617
(1.00)
0.262
(1.00)
0.00736
(0.501)
1
(1.00)
0.0107
(0.686)
1
(1.00)
'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.51 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S1.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
CTNNB1 MUTATED 6 2 3 2 0
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 25 21 12 8 9
'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.0755 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S2.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
CTNNB1 MUTATED 4 4 2 0 2
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 13 7 19 18 9
'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.000319 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.023

Table S3.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
CTNNB1 MUTATED 7 5 0 0
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 16 9 17 23

Figure S1.  Get High-res Image Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.000102 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.0074

Table S4.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
CTNNB1 MUTATED 9 0 3
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 13 32 20

Figure S2.  Get High-res Image Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.000609 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.043

Table S5.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
CTNNB1 MUTATED 5 7 0
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 32 9 25

Figure S3.  Get High-res Image Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.541 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S6.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
CTNNB1 MUTATED 4 0 8
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 22 9 35
'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.00882 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.58

Table S7.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
CTNNB1 MUTATED 6 6 0
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 32 12 22

Figure S4.  Get High-res Image Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.456 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S8.  Gene #1: 'CTNNB1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
CTNNB1 MUTATED 8 0 4
CTNNB1 WILD-TYPE 33 10 23
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.134 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S9.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
MUC5B MUTATED 4 4 1 3 4
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 27 19 14 7 5
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.207 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S10.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
MUC5B MUTATED 2 2 3 3 5
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 15 9 18 15 6
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.218 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S11.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
MUC5B MUTATED 3 1 6 5
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 20 13 11 18
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.364 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S12.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
MUC5B MUTATED 2 8 5
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 20 24 18
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.167 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S13.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
MUC5B MUTATED 5 2 8
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 32 14 17
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.409 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S14.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
MUC5B MUTATED 7 2 6
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 19 7 37
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.393 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S15.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
MUC5B MUTATED 5 4 6
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 33 14 16
'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.465 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S16.  Gene #2: 'MUC5B MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
MUC5B MUTATED 6 2 7
MUC5B WILD-TYPE 35 8 20
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.0539 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S17.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
CRIPAK MUTATED 3 3 0 4 1
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 28 20 15 6 8
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.533 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S18.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
CRIPAK MUTATED 3 2 1 1 2
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 14 9 20 17 9
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.257 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S19.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
CRIPAK MUTATED 5 0 2 2
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 18 14 15 21
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.162 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S20.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
CRIPAK MUTATED 5 3 1
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 17 29 22
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.588 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S21.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
CRIPAK MUTATED 6 1 2
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 31 15 23
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.688 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S22.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
CRIPAK MUTATED 3 0 6
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 23 9 37
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.655 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S23.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
CRIPAK MUTATED 6 1 2
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 32 17 20
'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.623 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S24.  Gene #3: 'CRIPAK MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
CRIPAK MUTATED 6 0 3
CRIPAK WILD-TYPE 35 10 24
'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.00857 (Chi-square test), Q value = 0.57

Table S25.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
TP53 MUTATED 5 0 4 5 1
TP53 WILD-TYPE 26 23 11 5 8

Figure S5.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.444 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S26.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
TP53 MUTATED 3 3 5 1 1
TP53 WILD-TYPE 14 8 16 17 10
'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.0122 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.77

Table S27.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
TP53 MUTATED 4 3 6 0
TP53 WILD-TYPE 19 11 11 23

Figure S6.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.0784 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S28.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
TP53 MUTATED 5 2 6
TP53 WILD-TYPE 17 30 17
'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.00968 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.63

Table S29.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
TP53 MUTATED 9 4 0
TP53 WILD-TYPE 28 12 25

Figure S7.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.087 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S30.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
TP53 MUTATED 2 0 11
TP53 WILD-TYPE 24 9 32
'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.0321 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S31.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
TP53 MUTATED 9 4 0
TP53 WILD-TYPE 29 14 22

Figure S8.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.0377 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S32.  Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
TP53 MUTATED 11 0 2
TP53 WILD-TYPE 30 10 25

Figure S9.  Get High-res Image Gene #4: 'TP53 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.427 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S33.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
MEN1 MUTATED 1 1 1 2 1
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 30 22 14 8 8
'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.0201 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S34.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
MEN1 MUTATED 0 3 4 0 0
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 17 8 17 18 11

Figure S10.  Get High-res Image Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.352 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S35.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
MEN1 MUTATED 1 2 3 1
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 22 12 14 22
'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.0698 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S36.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
MEN1 MUTATED 1 1 5
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 21 31 18
'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.666 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S37.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
MEN1 MUTATED 4 2 1
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 33 14 24
'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.514 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S38.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
MEN1 MUTATED 1 1 5
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 25 8 38
'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.771 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S39.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
MEN1 MUTATED 4 2 1
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 34 16 21
'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.536 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S40.  Gene #5: 'MEN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
MEN1 MUTATED 5 1 1
MEN1 WILD-TYPE 36 9 26
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.958 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S41.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
PRKAR1A MUTATED 2 1 1 1 1
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 29 22 14 9 8
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.702 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S42.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
PRKAR1A MUTATED 1 1 1 1 2
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 16 10 20 17 9
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.188 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S43.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
PRKAR1A MUTATED 2 1 3 0
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 21 13 14 23
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.878 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S44.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
PRKAR1A MUTATED 1 3 2
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 21 29 21
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.855 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S45.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
PRKAR1A MUTATED 4 1 1
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 33 15 24
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 1 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S46.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
PRKAR1A MUTATED 2 0 4
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 24 9 39
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.3 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S47.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
PRKAR1A MUTATED 4 2 0
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 34 16 22
'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.854 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S48.  Gene #6: 'PRKAR1A MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
PRKAR1A MUTATED 4 0 2
PRKAR1A WILD-TYPE 37 10 25
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.538 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S49.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 1 2 0 0 1
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 30 21 15 10 8
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.000785 (Chi-square test), Q value = 0.054

Table S50.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 0 3 0 0 0
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 17 8 21 18 11

Figure S11.  Get High-res Image Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 1 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S51.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 1 0 1 1
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 22 14 16 22
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 1 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S52.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 1 1 1
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 21 31 22
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.781 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S53.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 1 1 1
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 36 15 24
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.213 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S54.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 0 1 2
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 26 8 41
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.797 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S55.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 1 1 1
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 37 17 21
'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.234 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S56.  Gene #7: 'KRTAP4-5 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
KRTAP4-5 MUTATED 2 1 0
KRTAP4-5 WILD-TYPE 39 9 27
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.0602 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S57.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
ATN1 MUTATED 0 2 0 2 0
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 31 21 15 8 9
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.657 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S58.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
ATN1 MUTATED 1 1 0 1 0
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 16 10 21 17 11
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.877 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S59.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
ATN1 MUTATED 1 1 0 1
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 22 13 17 22
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 1 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S60.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
ATN1 MUTATED 1 1 1
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 21 31 22
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.781 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S61.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
ATN1 MUTATED 1 1 1
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 36 15 24
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.691 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S62.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
ATN1 MUTATED 2 0 1
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 24 9 42
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.797 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S63.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
ATN1 MUTATED 1 1 1
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 37 17 21
'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.709 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S64.  Gene #8: 'ATN1 MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
ATN1 MUTATED 1 0 2
ATN1 WILD-TYPE 40 10 25
'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'CN_CNMF'

P value = 0.693 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S65.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #1: 'CN_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 31 23 15 10 9
DMKN MUTATED 1 1 0 1 0
DMKN WILD-TYPE 30 22 15 9 9
'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

P value = 0.344 (Chi-square test), Q value = 1

Table S66.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #2: 'METHLYATION_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4 CLUS_5
ALL 17 11 21 18 11
DMKN MUTATED 0 1 2 0 0
DMKN WILD-TYPE 17 10 19 18 11
'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.617 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S67.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #3: 'MRNASEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3 CLUS_4
ALL 23 14 17 23
DMKN MUTATED 1 1 1 0
DMKN WILD-TYPE 22 13 16 23
'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 0.262 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S68.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #4: 'MRNASEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 22 32 23
DMKN MUTATED 1 0 2
DMKN WILD-TYPE 21 32 21
'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

P value = 0.00736 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.5

Table S69.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 37 16 25
DMKN MUTATED 0 3 0
DMKN WILD-TYPE 37 13 25

Figure S12.  Get High-res Image Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #5: 'MIRSEQ_CNMF'

'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 1 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S70.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #6: 'MIRSEQ_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 26 9 43
DMKN MUTATED 1 0 2
DMKN WILD-TYPE 25 9 41
'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

P value = 0.0107 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 0.69

Table S71.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 38 18 22
DMKN MUTATED 0 3 0
DMKN WILD-TYPE 38 15 22

Figure S13.  Get High-res Image Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #7: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CNMF'

'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

P value = 1 (Fisher's exact test), Q value = 1

Table S72.  Gene #9: 'DMKN MUTATION STATUS' versus Molecular Subtype #8: 'MIRSEQ_MATURE_CHIERARCHICAL'

nPatients CLUS_1 CLUS_2 CLUS_3
ALL 41 10 27
DMKN MUTATED 2 0 1
DMKN WILD-TYPE 39 10 26
Methods & Data
Input
  • Mutation data file = transformed.cor.cli.txt

  • Molecular subtypes file = ACC-TP.transferedmergedcluster.txt

  • Number of patients = 90

  • Number of significantly mutated genes = 9

  • Number of Molecular subtypes = 8

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

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

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] Greenwood and Nikulin, A guide to chi-squared testing, Wiley, New York. ISBN 047155779X (1996)
[2] 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)
[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)