This is a test version of Biostars. For the public version, visit https://www.biostars.org.
Different results from CNV analysis resources both by Broad Institute?

Question on CNV analysis using TCGA dataset.

In the page of firehose GDAC (http://firebrowse.org/api-docs/#!/Analyses/Amplified),

When I input “GNAS” in colon cancer, they respond it is not significant.

On the other hand, (http://www.broadinstitute.org/tcga/home)

When I input “GNAS” in this portal, they show the significant q-value in colon cancer.

Does anyone have an idea to explain why this difference happens?

Or does anyone have recommendation which pipeline should be used?

cnv tcga
• 1,687 views • link
updated by agicict agicict • written by nijironohata • nijironohata

1 answer

Though I did not analyze GDAC, judging from my experience, there are two possible reasons.

This may result from different calculation approach for p.value. For example, there are two popular statistical methods to compare two samples; one is t.test and the other is wilcoxn.

So you need to check whether they use different methods.

Additionally, this may be caused by different cohorts. You need to check if they were exactly same cohort (i.e same patients and information).

• 1 views • link
written by agicict agicict

Log in to answer this question.

More posts like this