↓ Skip to main content

qpure: A Tool to Estimate Tumor Cellularity from Genome-Wide Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism Profiles

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
qpure: A Tool to Estimate Tumor Cellularity from Genome-Wide Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism Profiles
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0045835
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Song, Katia Nones, David Miller, Ivon Harliwong, Karin S. Kassahn, Mark Pinese, Marina Pajic, Anthony J. Gill, Amber L. Johns, Matthew Anderson, Oliver Holmes, Conrad Leonard, Darrin Taylor, Scott Wood, Qinying Xu, Felicity Newell, Mark J. Cowley, Jianmin Wu, Peter Wilson, Lynn Fink, Andrew V. Biankin, Nic Waddell, Sean M. Grimmond, John V. Pearson

Abstract

Tumour cellularity, the relative proportion of tumour and normal cells in a sample, affects the sensitivity of mutation detection, copy number analysis, cancer gene expression and methylation profiling. Tumour cellularity is traditionally estimated by pathological review of sectioned specimens; however this method is both subjective and prone to error due to heterogeneity within lesions and cellularity differences between the sample viewed during pathological review and tissue used for research purposes. In this paper we describe a statistical model to estimate tumour cellularity from SNP array profiles of paired tumour and normal samples using shifts in SNP allele frequency at regions of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) in the tumour. We also provide qpure, a software implementation of the method. Our experiments showed that there is a medium correlation 0.42 ([Formula: see text]-value=0.0001) between tumor cellularity estimated by qpure and pathology review. Interestingly there is a high correlation 0.87 ([Formula: see text]-value [Formula: see text] 2.2e-16) between cellularity estimates by qpure and deep Ion Torrent sequencing of known somatic KRAS mutations; and a weaker correlation 0.32 ([Formula: see text]-value=0.004) between IonTorrent sequencing and pathology review. This suggests that qpure may be a more accurate predictor of tumour cellularity than pathology review. qpure can be downloaded from https://sourceforge.net/projects/qpure/.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 115 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Master 12 10%
Other 9 7%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 15 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 15%
Computer Science 4 3%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 16 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2014.
All research outputs
#13,368,181
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#106,425
of 193,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,047
of 171,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,197
of 4,420 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 171,685 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,420 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.