This tab shows an overview of the selected study/paper [more details]
Reference

Distinct patterns of somatic alterations in a lymphoblastoid and a tumor genome derived from the same individual.

Paper Id
COSP25950
Authors
Galante PA,Parmigiani RB,Zhao Q,Caballero OL,de Souza JE,Navarro FC,Gerber AL,Nicolás MF,Salim AC,Silva AP,Edsall L,Devalle S,Almeida LG,Ye Z,Kuan S,Pinheiro DG,Tojal I,Pedigoni RG,de Sousa RG,Oliveira TY,de Paula MG,Ohno-Machado L,Kirkness EF,Levy S,da Silva WA,Vasconcelos AT,Ren B,Zago MA,Strausberg RL,Simpson AJ,de Souza SJ and Camargo AA
Affiliation
Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, São Paulo Branch at Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo 01323-903, Brazil.
Journal
Nucleic acids research 2011;39(14):6056-68
ISSN:1362-4962
PUBMED:21493686
Abstract
Although patterns of somatic alterations have been reported for tumor genomes, little is known on how they compare with alterations present in non-tumor genomes. A comparison of the two would be crucial to better characterize the genetic alterations driving tumorigenesis. We sequenced the genomes of a lymphoblastoid (HCC1954BL) and a breast tumor (HCC1954) cell line derived from the same patient and compared the somatic alterations present in both. The lymphoblastoid genome presents a comparable number and similar spectrum of nucleotide substitutions to that found in the tumor genome. However, a significant difference in the ratio of non-synonymous to synonymous substitutions was observed between both genomes (P = 0.031). Protein-protein interaction analysis revealed that mutations in the tumor genome preferentially affect hub-genes (P = 0.0017) and are co-selected to present synergistic functions (P < 0.0001). KEGG analysis showed that in the tumor genome most mutated genes were organized into signaling pathways related to tumorigenesis. No such organization or synergy was observed in the lymphoblastoid genome. Our results indicate that endogenous mutagens and replication errors can generate the overall number of mutations required to drive tumorigenesis and that it is the combination rather than the frequency of mutations that is crucial to complete tumorigenic transformation.
Paper Status
Curated
Genes Analysed
229
Mutated Samples
1
Total No. of Samples
1
This tab shows genes with mutations in the selected study/paper [more details]
Genes Samples CDS Mutation AA Mutation
This tab shows genes without mutations in the selected study/paper [more details]
Non-Mutant Genes Gene Id (COSG)
This tab shows samples without mutations in the selected study/paper [more details]
Non-Mutant Samples Sample Id (COSS)
This tab shows mutated samples in the selected study/paper [more details]
Sample Name Mutation Count
This tab shows non coding variant in the selected study/paper [more details]
Sample ID Sample Name ID NCV Annotation Zygosity Chromosome Genome start Genome stop Genome version Strand WT seq Mut seq
This tab shows the copy number variation data for this study. Only variants (classified as gain or loss) are listed. [more details]
CNV Gene Sample Position Minor Allele Copy Number Average Ploidy

1. N/A represents cases where average ploidy value is not available( mostly ICGC samples). For some TCGA samples where minor allele information is not available the average ploidy value could not be calculated.

2. For TCGA samples, Ascat algorithm is used to calculate the average ploidy.

3. For CGP samples, Picnic algorithm is used to calculate the average ploidy.

Type
This tab shows a table of count of samples having gain or loss for all genes [more details]
Gene Gain Samples Loss Samples Samples Tested
This tab shows the fusion mutations observed in this sample [more details]
Gene Sample Name Id Sample(COSS) CDS Mutation Somatic status Zygosity Validated Type