Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Same mutation in two different signatures #38

Open
rahulk87 opened this issue May 7, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Same mutation in two different signatures #38

rahulk87 opened this issue May 7, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@rahulk87
Copy link

rahulk87 commented May 7, 2020

Hi,

I have been running Palimpsest on mutations in whole genome and same mutations but falling in specific regions of the genome. I observed that in these two different runs, same mutations annotated with two different signature i.e. mutation X annotated with signature SBS5 when I use whole genome mutations and same mutation X annotated with signature SBS84 when I use a subset of mutations in a specific genomic region.

Is there any plausible reason for this?

Thanks!!

@jayendrashinde91
Copy link

Hi @rahulk87
Assigning the probability of mutational signature to every somatic mutation depends on the number of mutations attributed to that mutational signature. This would vary in your two runs affecting the probabilities of associated mutational signatures. Please refer our paper for more details about the methods used in Palimpsest - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01358-x

@rahulk87
Copy link
Author

rahulk87 commented May 8, 2020

Thanks @jayendrashinde91 for your prompt reply, I read the methods in paper.

Actually, that's exactly my question is i.e. around 1000 mutations were attributed to signature SBS84 in sample X when I used mutations from specific genomic regions and when I used the whole genome mutations of that very sample, 0 mutations were attributed to SBS84, despite input contain those ~1000 mutations, how is it possible. This is the step before applying function "signature_origins". I used the object created by function "deconvolution_fit". Quite possible that I am missing something.

@FunGeST
Copy link
Owner

FunGeST commented May 28, 2020

Hi,

Sorry for the late reply. The probability of a specific mutation being attributed to a given signature depends on the overall signature decomposition for the sample. So if you change the input (by selecting a subset of mutations), the proportion of signatures will change, which ultimately can modify the probability of a particular mutation being due to each process. Regarding why signature composition varies when you select only a subset of mutations, this can be explained by biological reasons (mutational processes are affected by various features including transcription or replication in a signature-dependent way) or technical reasons (e.g. the number of mutations considered is low and the signature less reliable).

Hope this helps,
Eric

@rahulk87
Copy link
Author

Thanks Eric!!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants