Absolute quantification of somatic DNA alterations in ... - Nature
Absolute quantification of somatic DNA alterations in ... - Nature
Absolute quantification of somatic DNA alterations in ... - Nature
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
npg © 2012 <strong>Nature</strong> America, Inc. All rights reserved.<br />
A n A ly s i s<br />
a<br />
Reference allele concentration ratio<br />
2.0<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0<br />
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0<br />
Mutant allele concentration ratio<br />
29,268 <strong>somatic</strong> mutations identified <strong>in</strong> whole-exome hybrid capture<br />
Illum<strong>in</strong>a sequenc<strong>in</strong>g 37 data from 214 ovarian carc<strong>in</strong>oma tumor-<br />
normal pairs 34 (Fig. 4a). Tumor purity, ploidy and absolute copynumber<br />
values were obta<strong>in</strong>ed from Affymetrix SNP6.0 hybridization<br />
data on the same <strong>DNA</strong> aliquot that was sequenced, allow<strong>in</strong>g the<br />
rescal<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> allelic fractions to units <strong>of</strong> multiplicity (Fig. 4a,b; Onl<strong>in</strong>e<br />
Methods, equation (12)).<br />
This procedure identified pervasive subclonal po<strong>in</strong>t-mutations <strong>in</strong><br />
ovarian carc<strong>in</strong>oma samples. Although many <strong>of</strong> the mutations were<br />
clustered around <strong>in</strong>teger multiplicities, a substantial fraction occurred<br />
at multiplicities substantially less than one copy per average cancer<br />
cell, consistent with subclonal multiplicity (Fig. 4b)).<br />
Several l<strong>in</strong>es <strong>of</strong> evidence support the validity <strong>of</strong> these subclonal<br />
mutations, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Illum<strong>in</strong>a resequenc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>dependent wholegenome<br />
amplification aliquot, which confirmed both their presence<br />
(Supplementary Fig. 8a,b), and that their allelic fractions corresponded<br />
to subclonal multiplicity values (Supplementary Fig. 8c,d).<br />
In addition, the mutation spectrum seen for clonal and subclonal mutations<br />
was similar (root mean squared error (RMSE) = 0.04, Fig. 4c),<br />
consistent with a common mechanism <strong>of</strong> orig<strong>in</strong>. Power calculations<br />
showed that these samples were at least 80% powered for detection <strong>of</strong><br />
subclonal mutations occurr<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> cancer-cell fractions rang<strong>in</strong>g from<br />
0.1 to 0.53, with a median <strong>of</strong> 0.19 (Supplementary Fig. 7e).<br />
The distribution <strong>of</strong> subclonal multiplicity was similar <strong>in</strong> the majority<br />
<strong>of</strong> samples (Fig. 4b); it rapidly <strong>in</strong>creased at the sample-specific<br />
detection limit and then decreased <strong>in</strong> a manner approximated by<br />
an exponential decay <strong>in</strong> the multiplicity range <strong>of</strong> 0.05 to 0.5 when<br />
pool<strong>in</strong>g across all samples. In contrast, the high-grade serous ovarian<br />
carc<strong>in</strong>oma (HGS-OvCa) sample TCGA-24-1603 (Fig. 4d–f) showed<br />
evidence for discrete ‘macroscopic subclones’. Rescal<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> subclonal<br />
SCNAs (Fig. 4d) and po<strong>in</strong>t mutations (Fig. 4e) to units <strong>of</strong> cancer cell<br />
fraction (Fig. 4f) revealed discrete clusters near fractions 0.2, 0.3<br />
and 0.6 (Fig. 4f), imply<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>alterations</strong> with<strong>in</strong> each cluster likely<br />
co-occurred <strong>in</strong> the same cancer cells. We note that this comb<strong>in</strong>ation<br />
<strong>of</strong> cell fractions sums to more than one, imply<strong>in</strong>g that at least one <strong>of</strong><br />
the detected subclones was nested <strong>in</strong>side another.<br />
b<br />
Reference allele multiplicity<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
Clonal hom.<br />
Subclonal hom.<br />
Subclonal het.<br />
Clonal het.<br />
0 1 2 3 4<br />
Mutant allele multiplicity<br />
We next used ABSOLUTE to analyze the multiplicity <strong>of</strong> both the<br />
reference and alternate alleles <strong>in</strong> order to classify po<strong>in</strong>t mutations<br />
as either heterozygous or homozygous <strong>in</strong> the affected cell fraction<br />
(Fig. 5a–c). We considered 15 genes with mutations recently identified<br />
<strong>in</strong> these data 34 , <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g five known tumor suppressor genes<br />
and five oncogenes (Fig. 5d). The frequency <strong>of</strong> homozygous mutations<br />
<strong>in</strong> known tumor suppressor genes and oncogenes was significantly<br />
different, with a significantly elevated fraction <strong>of</strong> homozygous<br />
mutations <strong>in</strong> the tumor suppressor genes (P = 0.006, Fig. 5d) and no<br />
homozygous mutations <strong>in</strong> the oncogenes (P = 0.012, Fig. 5d). This<br />
result provides evidence support<strong>in</strong>g CDK12 as a candidate tumor suppressor<br />
gene <strong>in</strong> ovarian carc<strong>in</strong>oma 34 , s<strong>in</strong>ce 7 <strong>of</strong> 12 CDK12 mutations<br />
were homozygous (P = 6.5 × 10 −5 ; Fig. 5d).<br />
Overall, TP53 had among the greatest fraction <strong>of</strong> clonal, homozygous<br />
and ‘multiplicity >1’ mutations <strong>of</strong> any gene <strong>in</strong> the cod<strong>in</strong>g exome<br />
(Fig. 5e), demonstrat<strong>in</strong>g the clear identification <strong>of</strong> a key <strong>in</strong>itiat<strong>in</strong>g event<br />
<strong>in</strong> HGS-OvCa carc<strong>in</strong>ogenesis 38 directly from multiplicity analysis.<br />
Whole-genome doubl<strong>in</strong>g occurs frequently <strong>in</strong> human cancer<br />
For many cancer types, the distribution <strong>of</strong> total copy number (ploidy)<br />
was markedly bi-modal (Fig. 3c), consistent with chromosome-count<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>iles derived from SKY 10,13 . Although these results are consistent<br />
with whole-genome doubl<strong>in</strong>g dur<strong>in</strong>g their <strong>somatic</strong> evolution, it has<br />
been difficult to rule out the alternative hypothesis that evolution<br />
<strong>of</strong> high-ploidy karyotypes results from a process <strong>of</strong> successive<br />
partial amplifications 12 .<br />
To study genome doubl<strong>in</strong>gs, we used homologous copy-number<br />
<strong>in</strong>formation—that is, the copy numbers, b i and c i , <strong>of</strong> the two homologous<br />
chromosome segments at each locus. By look<strong>in</strong>g at the distributions<br />
<strong>of</strong> b i and c i across the genome, we could draw <strong>in</strong>ferences<br />
regard<strong>in</strong>g genome doubl<strong>in</strong>g. Immediately follow<strong>in</strong>g genome doubl<strong>in</strong>g,<br />
both b i and c i would be even numbers. Follow<strong>in</strong>g the loss <strong>of</strong> a<br />
s<strong>in</strong>gle copy <strong>of</strong> a region, the larger <strong>of</strong> b i and c i will rema<strong>in</strong> even, but<br />
the smaller would become odd. In fact, when we looked at highploidy<br />
samples, we discerned that the higher <strong>of</strong> b i and c i was usually<br />
even throughout the genome, consistent with their hav<strong>in</strong>g arisen by<br />
418 VOLUME 30 NUMBER 5 MAY 2012 nature biotechnology<br />
c<br />
Reference allele concentration ratio<br />
2.0<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0<br />
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0<br />
Mutant allele concentration ratio<br />
Figure 5 Classification <strong>of</strong> <strong>somatic</strong> mutations by multiplicity analysis <strong>in</strong> 214 primary HGS-OvCa tumor<br />
samples. (a) Empirical density estimate <strong>of</strong> allelic concentration ratios, which are obta<strong>in</strong>ed by multiplication<br />
<strong>of</strong> the allelic fraction by the copy ratio at that locus. (b) Density estimate <strong>of</strong> allelic multiplicity estimates, as<br />
<strong>in</strong> Figure 4b, for reference versus mutant allele. Mutations were classified <strong>in</strong>to the four <strong>in</strong>dicated categories<br />
accord<strong>in</strong>g to their mutant and reference allele multiplicity. (c) The density estimates <strong>of</strong> allelic concentration<br />
ratios for each <strong>of</strong> the four mutation classes <strong>in</strong> b are shown superimposed. (d) Mutation classification<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>iles <strong>of</strong> genes identified as significantly recurrent <strong>in</strong> HGS-OvCa 34 , as well as several COSMIC genes with<br />
previously observed mutations <strong>in</strong> these data. Note that only <strong>in</strong>dividual po<strong>in</strong>t mutations were considered<br />
here; the possibility <strong>of</strong> recessive <strong>in</strong>activation through multiple mutations (compound heterozygosity) was<br />
not considered. (e) Histograms <strong>of</strong> gene classification fractions for 1,412 genes hav<strong>in</strong>g at least five recurrent<br />
mutations. Dotted vertical l<strong>in</strong>es denote the 5th (top) and 95th (other) percentiles <strong>of</strong> each distribution.<br />
No mutations occurr<strong>in</strong>g at multiplicity >1 were observed <strong>in</strong> NF1 (data not shown).<br />
e<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> genes<br />
d<br />
All genes<br />
TP53 (160)<br />
NF1 (15)<br />
BRCA2 (5)<br />
CDK12 (12)<br />
BRCA1 (6)<br />
GABRA6 (4)<br />
RB1 (7)<br />
FAT3 (19)<br />
CCNE1 (1)<br />
CSMD3 (32)<br />
BRAF (4)<br />
KRAS (4)<br />
PIK3CA (6)<br />
GLI2 (7)<br />
NRAS (1)<br />
Subclonal het.<br />
200 TP53<br />
150<br />
100<br />
50<br />
0<br />
Clonal hom.<br />
1,000<br />
800<br />
600<br />
400<br />
200<br />
0<br />
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0<br />
Fraction <strong>of</strong> mutations<br />
Clonal multiplicity > 1<br />
800<br />
600<br />
TP53<br />
400<br />
200<br />
0<br />
NF1<br />
TP53<br />
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0<br />
Fraction <strong>of</strong> mutations per gene (N = 1,412)