-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 83
Add filter for non-synonymous mutations and re-run TMB with bug fix #728
Add filter for non-synonymous mutations and re-run TMB with bug fix #728
Conversation
add folder for notebooks
add gitignore
update output file path handle in get-tcga-capture_kit.py
add boxplot.R
skip the manifest header
add ci for tcga-capture-kit-investigation
Merge branch 'analyses/tcga-capture-kit-investigation' of https://github.com/yuankunzhu/OpenPBTA-analysis into Teja_tmbQC
…vestigation.sh script
Co-Authored-By: jashapiro <[email protected]>
This is a reminder to myself to update the blog post with these updates to TMB. @cansavvy |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks great. Do we want to include a version without the nonsyn filter as well, just for comparison? I would not put that in the final figure, but having the figure and/or data table might be nice.
As to your question about margins, I might try (if you have not already) assembling the plot with patchwork
or cowplot
, both of which tend to handle adjusting parameters to make the grids line up pretty automatically.
nonsynonymous <- c( | ||
"Missense_Mutation", | ||
"Frame_Shift_Del", | ||
"In_Frame_Ins", | ||
"Frame_Shift_Ins", | ||
"Splice_Site", | ||
"Nonsense_Mutation", | ||
"In_Frame_Del", | ||
"Nonstop_Mutation", | ||
"Translation_Start_Site" | ||
) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As we have discussed, this does differ slightly from the standard proposed in https://jitc.bmj.com/content/8/1/e000147#DC by the Friends of Cancer Research TMB Harmonization Project.
The relevant table is here: #725 (comment)
In particular, the FoCR group does not include Translation_Start_Site
, Nonstop_Mutation
or Splice_Site
. I tend to think all of those are worth including, but I guess one simple question is how common these mutations actually are in the data set. Either way, we will want to standardize our criteria across analyses.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this question is something I can ask in a next PR that does some more exploration. I'll file an issue that lays out what kinds of exploration analyses I think should be included.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Filed the issue: #729
I want to do this, but figured I should make it a separate PR so this one stays focused. |
The follow up questions, I'll address on separate PRs, notoed on this issue here: #729 For wrapping up this current PR, I'll play around a bit with finding a better way to "automagically" align the tmb plots. |
I tried |
@jashapiro I actually use |
Not sure what else to try for the "automagic" y axis alignment (see above comments). But in the interest of moving this and the future issues (#729) forward, I've wrote this problem down here: cansavvy/openpbta-notebook-concept#9 and will return to it if we have any breakthroughs. With this being noted, are we ready to merge, @jashapiro ? |
|
Purpose/implementation Section
What scientific question is your analysis addressing?
I would like to do some more in depth comparison of the old and new results, but I will save that for a different PR so as to not have too many things at once.
What was your approach?
--nonsynfilter
which is a TRUE/FALSE on whether mutations should be filtered to be only non-synonymous mutations.fig2-mutational-landscape.R
figure again so it's updated.What GitHub issue does your pull request address?
#726
Directions for reviewers. Tell potential reviewers what kind of feedback you are soliciting.
Is the analysis in a mature enough form that the resulting figure(s) and/or table(s) are ready for review?
Yes. The TMBs for the adults do seem slightly higher? That's good.
Results
What is your summary of the results?
Still figuring this out. It's not changed as I suspected it would be.
*Note that data files themselves are not pushed to GitHub but we will need to update them in the next data release.
Reproducibility Checklist
Documentation Checklist
README
and it is up to date.analyses/README.md
and the entry is up to date.