This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 21, 2023. It is now read-only.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add pnoc003 clinical review #800
Add pnoc003 clinical review #800
Changes from 3 commits
ed52e3e
e8cc30b
153c191
497355a
569c9e7
5e48446
0a5bafc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As I'm looking at this, I am wondering if, for the purposes of this notebook, we might want to standardize the labels between the
H3 Status
andmolecular_subtype
so you can essentially ask "are these the same?" That logic might be more straightforward. Thoughts? We'd probably also want to filter out the no reports - I think this is essence what this is accomplishing as well.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suppose this extends to the
Notes
step, too.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought about changing the values in H3 Status to what we have in molecular_subtype, but since we have some additional values from IDH/BRAF alterations I assumed that it would be the same logic of
grepl
because of the IDH/BRAF alterations subtyping that is not part of clinical review. For example these samples have the additional info frommolecular-subtyping-HGG
:Maybe these IDH, BRAF alterations should also be clinical reviewed so we can match the values?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see - so in the
PT_0MXPTTM3
case, H3 status is wildtype which agrees with the molecular subtyping status and in thePT_HGM20MW7
H3 status and the subtyping is in agreement, it's just the matter of BRAF V600E also being included.Taking a step back - my understanding of this addition is that we're essentially looking for any K28M mutations that were missed because they were not detected in the SNV consensus for whatever reason (from #751 and some additional context in #735). I had some ideas about how we might approach this differently for clarity reasons, but I think we can go with this solution and have you add comments throughout at each condition within calls to
case_when()
(lines 180-197).Large diffs are not rendered by default.
This file was deleted.
Large diffs are not rendered by default.