Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ymc
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2010
    • 496

    #1

    How to estimate tumor purity?

    Typically, tumor samples contain normal cells to a certain extent. Some programs that deal with somatic mutations take tumor purity percentage as an input, e.g. ExomeCNV, VarScan, etc.

    I noticed that ExomeCNV's LOH calling algorithm supposedly can be used to estimate the % contaminated by normal cells. But it is not well documented in their User Guide. Can anyone show me how to do this?

    Or are there other programs that can estimate tumor purity?

    Thanks in advance.
  • chrisamiller
    Junior Member
    • Jun 2008
    • 7

    #2
    Succinctly, you expect heterozygous somatic SNVs to be present in a sample at a frequency around 50% (and homozygous changes to be present at 100%). If your tumor is impure, these fractions will drop. If your sample is 10% normal cells, your numbers would be 45% and 90%. Regions with LOH or single copy number loss provide larger numbers of somatic mutations that should occur at nearly 100%, making this estimation easier.

    Comment

    • davidblaney
      Member
      • Nov 2011
      • 18

      #3
      Is this what you are looking for?

      Comment

      • ymc
        Senior Member
        • Mar 2010
        • 496

        #4
        Originally posted by davidblaney View Post
        Is this what you are looking for?

        http://genomebiology.com/2013/14/7/R80/abstract
        looks good. Thanks a lot!

        Comment

        • ymc
          Senior Member
          • Mar 2010
          • 496

          #5
          This is the function in ExomeCNV to estimate fraction of normal cells in tumor sample. It takes two arguments. The first one is the logR (aka log intensity) value vector for different regions indexed from 1 to length(logR). The second argument is a vector of indexes of the logR vector that is determined to be LOH.

          ========================================
          guesstimate.contamination <-
          function(logR, region.idx=NULL) {
          if (is.null(region.idx)) region.idx = 1:length(logR)
          med.logR = median(logR[region.idx], na.rm=TRUE)
          if (med.logR < 0) { rho = 0.5 } else { rho = 1.5 }
          return((2**med.logR - rho)/(1 - rho))
          }
          =====================================

          From the look of it, it takes the median of the logR values in LOH regions and then apply this formula

          let logR_m be the logR median among the LOH regions

          if logR_m >=0, contamination = 3 - 2^(logR_m + 1)
          if logR_m < 0, contamination = 2^(logR_m + 1) - 1

          It seems to me it is theoretically possible to have contamination to be outside the bound of 0 and 1. Do you think this function is correct?

          Comment

          • ymc
            Senior Member
            • Mar 2010
            • 496

            #6
            According to formula described in their paper, the estimation formula is

            c = 1 - 2*average(|BAF_LOH - 0.5|)



            This formula seems to make more sense. It also won't make c goes out of bound.

            So which formula is correct???

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • SEQadmin2
              Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
              by SEQadmin2



              Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

              Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
              ...
              10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
              by SEQadmin2


              Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.

              We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing
              ...
              09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 11:13 AM
            0 responses
            44 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
            0 responses
            33 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
            0 responses
            44 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
            0 responses
            45 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...