Cargando…

Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies

Sample tracking errors have been and always will be a part of the practical implementation of large experiments. It has recently been proposed that expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) and their associated effects could be used to identify sample mix-ups and this approach has been applied to a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lynch, Andy G., Chin, Suet-Feung, Dunning, Mark J., Caldas, Carlos, Tavaré, Simon, Curtis, Christina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3415393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22912679
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041815
_version_ 1782240352066863104
author Lynch, Andy G.
Chin, Suet-Feung
Dunning, Mark J.
Caldas, Carlos
Tavaré, Simon
Curtis, Christina
author_facet Lynch, Andy G.
Chin, Suet-Feung
Dunning, Mark J.
Caldas, Carlos
Tavaré, Simon
Curtis, Christina
author_sort Lynch, Andy G.
collection PubMed
description Sample tracking errors have been and always will be a part of the practical implementation of large experiments. It has recently been proposed that expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) and their associated effects could be used to identify sample mix-ups and this approach has been applied to a number of large population genomics studies to illustrate the prevalence of the problem. We had adopted a similar approach, termed ‘BADGER’, in the METABRIC project. METABRIC is a large breast cancer study that may have been the first in which eQTL-based detection of mismatches was used during the study, rather than after the event, to aid quality assurance. We report here on the particular issues associated with large cancer studies performed using historical samples, which complicate the interpretation of such approaches. In particular we identify the complications of using tumour samples, of considering cellularity and RNA quality, of distinct subgroups existing in the study population (including family structures), and of choosing eQTLs to use. We also present some results regarding the design of experiments given consideration of these matters. The eQTL-based approach to identifying sample tracking errors is seen to be of value to these studies, but requiring care in its implementation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3415393
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34153932012-08-21 Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies Lynch, Andy G. Chin, Suet-Feung Dunning, Mark J. Caldas, Carlos Tavaré, Simon Curtis, Christina PLoS One Research Article Sample tracking errors have been and always will be a part of the practical implementation of large experiments. It has recently been proposed that expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) and their associated effects could be used to identify sample mix-ups and this approach has been applied to a number of large population genomics studies to illustrate the prevalence of the problem. We had adopted a similar approach, termed ‘BADGER’, in the METABRIC project. METABRIC is a large breast cancer study that may have been the first in which eQTL-based detection of mismatches was used during the study, rather than after the event, to aid quality assurance. We report here on the particular issues associated with large cancer studies performed using historical samples, which complicate the interpretation of such approaches. In particular we identify the complications of using tumour samples, of considering cellularity and RNA quality, of distinct subgroups existing in the study population (including family structures), and of choosing eQTLs to use. We also present some results regarding the design of experiments given consideration of these matters. The eQTL-based approach to identifying sample tracking errors is seen to be of value to these studies, but requiring care in its implementation. Public Library of Science 2012-08-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3415393/ /pubmed/22912679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041815 Text en © 2012 Lynch et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lynch, Andy G.
Chin, Suet-Feung
Dunning, Mark J.
Caldas, Carlos
Tavaré, Simon
Curtis, Christina
Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies
title Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies
title_full Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies
title_fullStr Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies
title_full_unstemmed Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies
title_short Calling Sample Mix-Ups in Cancer Population Studies
title_sort calling sample mix-ups in cancer population studies
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3415393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22912679
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041815
work_keys_str_mv AT lynchandyg callingsamplemixupsincancerpopulationstudies
AT chinsuetfeung callingsamplemixupsincancerpopulationstudies
AT dunningmarkj callingsamplemixupsincancerpopulationstudies
AT caldascarlos callingsamplemixupsincancerpopulationstudies
AT tavaresimon callingsamplemixupsincancerpopulationstudies
AT curtischristina callingsamplemixupsincancerpopulationstudies