Closed dannyjomaa closed 2 years ago
Hey,
so copy neutral would be -1, log2(2/2)-1? and not 0, log2(2/2)? The later is more standard, but unless you are working with a very pure tumor (micro-disected, sorted blood cancer, etc.) you should add some padding in. For example:
for a perfectly pure tumor, loss of one copy would be log2(1/2) = -1, but tumors are rarely 100% pure, I would probably set the low cutoff to log2(1.4/2) or so to account for the impurity, though this number would depend on any purity estimates you have.
Hope this helps
Thanks so much! That's really helpful. I added in some padding as you suggested and it seems to be working well.
Hello! I'm fairly new to working with copy number data and am trying to summarize copy number calls for a cohort of tumor samples using cnFreq. My data is reported in .seg files and scaled differently than the example data provided in the cnFreq tutorial here, with values ranging from -30 to 5 (I believe because they're reported as log2(CN) - 1 values). Would it be reasonable to still use cnFreq to summarize the cohort and to adjust the
CN_low_cutoff
andCN_high_cutoff
parameters accordingly (e.g.CN_low_cutoff = -1
for deletions andCN_high_cutoff = 0.5
for amplifications)? Thanks so much in advance!