callachennault
commented
2 months ago For samples where difference is > 1000 days, the difference is because the DDP age_at_sequencing value is anonymized after its calculation to not specify an age above 90. For example: GENIE-MSK-P-0001614-T01-IM3 DDP age_at_seq_report value (in days): 32873 => 90 years CDM age_at_seq_report value (in days): 36068 => 98 years
To discuss:
- Should the CDM calculation be anonymizing the age value in the same way?
- The DDP calculation also doesn't specify age_at_sequencing to the exact day (even for ages >18 and < 89) to avoid providing info about the patient's birth date. Should CDM do this?
Done Condition (What do we need? Why do we need it? Keep this is small as possible!)
Determine what causes difference in age_at_sequencing value and correct bug if needed.
Technical Description (How are we going to achieve the above)
Around 130 samples that differ by >1000 days between CDM and DDP calculation age_at_seq_comparison (2).txt
Potential Issues
Dependencies
Technical Requirements
Outside People/Teams
Changes