Skip to content
Datasets/CGCI-HTMCP-CC

HIV+ Tumor Molecular Characterization Project - Cervical Cancer

MixedProject-curated
CGCIAvailable from GDC and IDC

212 cervical carcinomas from Ugandan women, 98% Black African and enriched for HIV infection - the largest genomically characterized cervical cancer cohort from sub-Saharan Africa, with ECOG status on 99% of cases, treatment outcome on 68%, and a derivable follow-up time for every single case.

Can it answer your research question?

4 of 6 supported
  • Overall survival

    Supported

    Vital status and time are populated; median follow-up 1.1 years; 212 cases with follow-up; endpoint: overall survival.API

  • Progression or recurrence

    Limited

    progression_or_recurrence is informative for 8% of cases.API

  • Treatment response

    Supported

    disease_response is populated for 100% of cases; criteria: complete response, partial response.API

  • Which drug was given

    Supported

    therapeutic_agents is recorded for 30% of cases.API

  • Stage-adjusted modelling

    Not supported

    ajcc_pathologic_stage is informative for no case in the harmonized records.API

  • Analysis by race or ethnicity

    Supported

    Race is informative for 98% of cases.API

Judged from the repository’s own field completeness (thresholds). “Not measured” means we have not probed that field for this record, not that the data lack it.

At a glance

Every percentage is the repository’s own record of what is filled in
CasesAPI2
212
Measurement types
10
7,160 files, 88 TB
Follow-upAPI
13.2 months
for 212 of 212 cases; overall survival
Treatment responseAPI
Recorded
complete response, partial response, progressive disease

SubjectCALC

Cervix

As filed by the repository

Epithelial Neoplasms, NOSAdenomas and AdenocarcinomasComplex Epithelial NeoplasmsSquamous Cell NeoplasmsCervix uteriuterine cervix

Who is in the cohortAPI

A usable value“Not reported” or “unknown”No value recorded
  • Sex212 female
  • Race207 black or african american · 4 unknown · 1 not reported
  • Ethnicity100 not hispanic or latino · 1 hispanic or latino · 82 unknown · 29 not reported
  • Vital status116 dead · 96 alive

Age at diagnosis

Median 48, middle half 41–56, range 27–82 years across 114 cases.

What was measured, and on how many

10 measurement types, 1 covering the whole cohort.

  • Clinical212 of 212 · 100%
  • Whole-slide tissue images211 of 212 · >99%
  • DICOM medical imaging211 of 212 · >99%
  • Whole genome sequencing124 of 212 · 58%
  • Copy Number Variation124 of 212 · 58%
  • Somatic Structural Variation124 of 212 · 58%
  • Bulk RNA sequencing123 of 212 · 58%
  • DNA methylation array120 of 212 · 57%
  • microRNA sequencing118 of 212 · 56%
  • Targeted DNA panel sequencing89 of 212 · 42%
Platform, files and data levels
AssayPlatformFilesLevels
ClinicalAPI-216-
Whole-slide tissue imagesAPIillumina525-
DICOM medical imagingAPI--DICOM series
Whole genome sequencingAPIillumina2,533-
Copy Number VariationAPI-640-
Somatic Structural VariationAPI-640-
Bulk RNA sequencingAPIillumina1,372-
DNA methylation arrayAPIillumina360-
microRNA sequencingAPIillumina570-
Targeted DNA panel sequencingAPIillumina1,366-
How complete all 29 clinical fields are - 16 informative for at least 80% of cases

A field counts as informative only when it holds a real value. “Not reported” blocks an analysis just as a missing field does. Fields marked 1:n can hold several records per case, so they show the share of cases with any record.

Informative - a usable valuePresent but uninformative - “not reported” or “unknown”Absent - no value recorded

Outcome

  • Vital statusAPI100%
  • Cause of deathAPI9%
  • Progression or recurrenceAPI0%
  • Last known disease statusAPI0%

Follow-up

  • Disease response at follow-up1:nAPI100%
  • ECOG performance statusAPI99%
  • Progression at follow-upAPI8%

Treatment

  • Prior treatmentAPI100%
  • Treatment type1:nAPI100%
  • Treatment given1:nAPI100%
  • Treatment outcome1:nAPI68%
  • Therapeutic agents1:nAPI30%
  • Regimen or line of therapyAPI0%

Staging

  • AJCC pathologic stageAPI0%
  • AJCC clinical stageAPI0%

Diagnosis

  • Tissue or organ of originAPI100%
  • Prior malignancyAPI100%
  • Primary diagnosisAPI>99%
  • Synchronous malignancyAPI>99%

Pathology

  • Classification of tumorAPI100%
  • Morphology (ICD-O)API99%
  • Tumor gradeAPI98%

Demographics

  • Sex at birthAPI100%
  • RaceAPI98%
  • EthnicityAPI48%
  • Population groupAPI0%
  • Country of residenceAPI0%

Exposure

  • Tobacco smoking statusAPI>99%
  • Alcohol historyAPI0%

Access

MixedSome components are open; others need approval.API

Data Access Request through dbGaP using an eRA Commons account; institutional signing official approval required

Open components
2,457 open-access files
Controlled components
4,703 controlled-access files
Typical turnaround
days to a few weeks after signing official approval
License
NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy terms
Citation requirement
Cite the dataset accession and the program's publication guidelines; see the GDC publication policy.

What it is good for

Written and checked by a reviewer, not generated from metadata.

  1. 1. Does HPV clade shape the tumor epigenome and transcriptome differently in an African cohort than in the predominantly North American and European cohorts that define current cervical cancer subtypes?

    Needs approved accessn ≈ 118HUMAN

    Methylation arrays are available on 120 cases and RNA sequencing on 123, on the same tumors as whole genome sequencing that can be used to type and subclassify the integrated HPV. This is the design the marker paper used, and the cohort is large enough to repeat it with different clade groupings or to test subtype assignments derived from TCGA-CESC against an independent, differently constituted population.

    Statistical note: Analyses restricted to the intersection of methylation and expression leave roughly 118 cases; clade subgroups below about 25 cases will not support multiple-testing corrected genome-wide comparisons.

    NeedsDNA methylationBulk RNA sequencingWhole genome sequencingdiagnoses.primary_diagnosisdemographic.race

    A published example: PMID 32747824

  2. 2. Do molecular subtypes derived from predominantly white cohorts transfer to Black African patients, or do they misclassify tumors in this population?

    Needs approved accessn ≈ 120HUMAN

    207 of 212 cases are recorded as Black or African American, making this the only cohort in this corpus where a non-white group constitutes more than half the participants. Expression and methylation data allow subtype classifiers trained on TCGA to be applied directly, and classifier failure is itself the finding.

    Statistical note: Because the cohort is nearly homogeneous by race, this is a transfer-validation design rather than a within-cohort disparities comparison; there is no internal white comparison group.

    NeedsBulk RNA sequencingDNA methylationdemographic.race
  3. 3. Which molecular features are associated with performance status and with response to chemoradiation in a setting where platinum-based chemoradiation is the dominant treatment?

    Needs approved accessn ≈ 144HUMAN

    ECOG performance status is informative on 98.6% of cases, which is exceptional - most GDC projects record it for none. Treatment type is populated for every case, therapeutic agents for 29.7% (cisplatin, paclitaxel and carboplatin are the commonest), and a treatment outcome field is populated for 67.9%. Together these support a response analysis that is impossible in most cohorts of this size.

    Statistical note: Roughly 144 cases have a populated treatment outcome. Response categories are unevenly distributed and the outcome field is one-to-many, so collapse to a binary responder definition per case before modeling and pre-register that definition.

    NeedsBulk RNA sequencingTreatment recordsClinical datafollow_ups.ecog_performance_statusdiagnoses.treatments.treatment_outcomediagnoses.treatments.therapeutic_agents
  4. 4. How do survival patterns in this cohort compare with cervical cancer cohorts from high-income settings, given a median follow-up of only 13.2 months?

    Answerable as shippedn ≈ 212HUMAN

    Vital status is informative for 100% of cases and follow-up time is computable, giving a usable overall survival endpoint. The short follow-up is itself scientifically interesting because it reflects real-world attrition in the setting where the cohort was recruited.

    Statistical note: Median follow-up is 13.2 months and the maximum is 32.7, so late events are not observed. Report restricted mean survival time or landmark analyses rather than median overall survival, and do not compare medians directly against cohorts with five-year follow-up.

    NeedsClinical dataOutcome datademographic.vital_statusdiagnoses.days_to_last_follow_up
  5. 5. Can radiology and histopathology images from this cohort be used to build or validate imaging models on a population that is absent from almost every public imaging training set?

    Needs another datasetn ≈ 211HUMAN

    Histopathology and radiology are both available for 211 of 212 cases, alongside the molecular data. Imaging models trained largely on North American and European cohorts have documented performance gaps on under-represented populations, and this is one of the few resources that permits an external check.

    Statistical note: Suitable for external validation rather than primary training; 211 cases is small for training a deep model from scratch.

    NeedsHistopathology slidesRadiology imagingBulk RNA sequencing

What it cannot tell you

1 blocking

Written by a reviewer against the source, not inferred from what is missing.

BlockingMissing dataHUMAN

Tumor stage is not populated for any case in the GDC harmonized clinical records - both AJCC pathologic stage and AJCC clinical stage are empty for all 212 cases. Since stage is the dominant prognostic factor in cervical cancer, any survival model built from these records alone is unadjusted for the single most important covariate.

Affects: Multivariable survival modeling; Prognostic biomarker discovery; Any comparison of outcomes against staged cohorts

Mitigation: The marker publication reports stage information, so it exists outside the harmonized records. Obtain it from the publication's supplementary material or through the dbGaP phenotype files before claiming any stage-adjusted result.

MajorMissing dataHUMAN

HIV status is not available as a structured field, despite being the organizing scientific rationale for the cohort. Neither CD4 count nor antiretroviral therapy history appears in the harmonized clinical records.

Affects: Any HIV-stratified comparison; Immune-context analyses

Mitigation: Request the full phenotype file through dbGaP. Do not assume HIV positivity for all participants: the project name describes the study population, not a guarantee about every case.

MajorStatistical powerHUMAN

Median follow-up is 13.2 months with a maximum of 32.7, derivable for all 212 cases. Events accumulate over a much longer horizon in cervical cancer, so the observed survival experience is heavily right-censored.

Affects: Median overall survival estimates; Five-year survival comparisons

Mitigation: Use restricted mean survival time over a horizon the data support, or landmark analysis. State the follow-up distribution explicitly in any comparison.

MajorPopulation coverageHUMAN

Ethnicity is recorded as unknown or not reported for 111 of 212 cases, and the cohort is drawn from a single geographic setting. Findings describe Ugandan cervical cancer patients and should not be generalised to Black populations elsewhere, whose exposure and treatment contexts differ substantially.

Affects: Generalization to African-ancestry populations outside Uganda

Mitigation: Frame results as specific to this cohort and setting, and report the recruitment context alongside any ancestry claim.

MajorAccess constraintHUMAN

Of 7,160 files, 4,703 are controlled access. Sequence-level data including the whole genome sequencing require an approved dbGaP data access request; only 2,457 files can be downloaded without approval.

Affects: Any analysis requiring raw or aligned sequence data

Mitigation: Start the dbGaP request before planning the analysis, and check whether derived open-access files answer the question first.

Not appropriate for

  • Estimating cervical cancer incidence or population-level disease burden. - This is a convenience sample of patients presenting to participating centres, not a population-based registry. It carries no denominator and no sampling frame.HUMAN
  • Stage-adjusted prognostic modeling using only the GDC clinical records. - Stage is empty for all 212 cases in those records, so a model cannot adjust for it no matter how it is specified.HUMAN
  • Comparing HIV-positive and HIV-negative tumor biology within the cohort. - HIV status is not present as a structured variable in the harmonized records, so the comparison cannot be constructed without obtaining additional controlled phenotype data.HUMAN

Who has used it

Articles that analyzed these data, counted separately from articles that only cited the paper. Only the first counts as reuse.

Analyzed the dataCALC2
21
accession in the methods; 100% of a 20-article sample really cited it
Declared using it
5
named in a data availability statement
Cited the paper
70
attention to the publication, not reuse of the data
Against expectation
Somewhat below
about 44 articles expected; index -1.04

What articles did with it

Only the last row counts as reuse. Where the accession appears in an article tells us what the authors did with the data.

  • Cited the paper70
  • Mentioned the dataset2
  • Accession found in text0
  • Declared using it5
  • Analyzed the data21

Against comparable datasets

21 articles analyzed these data. About 44 would be expected. The expectation comes from a model of size, age, breadth and access tier.

  • Analyzed it21
  • Expected~44
Reuse assessment
  • Reuse is within the expected range for comparable datasets (index -1.04).

Compared against 132 datasets in this corpus with a citable accession and sufficient metadata. See Methods for the model.

Articles that analyzed the data

Examples, not the full list. 28 articles matching this dataset's accession search were retrieved and graded individually; these are the strongest of those.

Deep-review sample: author overlap and funding were checked only for the 10 articles listed here, not for every article examined. Of the 10 that analyzed the data, 9 of the 10 we could check had no author in common with the generating team, and 2 of the 10 we could check were themselves NCI-funded. These are sample counts, not population estimates.

Community examples

Share your example

Analyses someone ran on these data end to end, each with a receipt recording when it ran, against which packages and for how long.

beginner

Which classes of analysis do this cohort's clinical records actually support, and which are ruled out before I request access?

Audit whether this dataset can answer your question

CD2S workbooks · ran 21 Sept 2026
pythonabout a minuteexecuted
Required inputs
  • A GDC project identifier
  • Network access to api.gdc.cancer.gov
Expected outputs
  • Per-field coverage table separating populated from informative values
  • Assay coverage as a percentage of the cohort
  • A yes/no verdict for six common analysis classes
  • A chart contrasting populated with informative coverage, field by field
Steps
  1. Fetch project summary and per-assay case counts
  2. Request facet counts for the clinical fields that gate common analyses
  3. Separate absent fields from fields populated with non-answers
  4. Flag one-to-many fields where per-case percentages cannot be inferred
  5. Retrieve case-level fields and test whether a survival endpoint is derivable
  6. Print a verdict for each analysis class
intermediate

Is performance status associated with response to chemoradiation, and which agents were actually given?

Treatment response, after checking the response field is real

CD2S workbooks · ran 21 Sept 2026
pythonabout a minuteexecuted
Required inputs
  • Open GDC clinical records for CGCI-HTMCP-CC
  • scipy, pandas
Expected outputs
  • Separation of genuine response categories from disease-status codes
  • Per-case responder/progressor labels under a stated rule
  • Mann-Whitney comparison of ECOG between response groups
  • Agent frequency table
  • A two-panel chart of response composition and ECOG by response group
Steps
  1. Facet the two response-bearing fields and classify their values
  2. Collapse one-to-many treatment records to one label per case
  3. Compare performance status between response groups
  4. Tabulate the therapeutic agents actually recorded
advanced

Given a research goal, which dataset should an agent choose, and what must it refuse to do with it?

Select a dataset the way an agent should

CD2S workbooks · ran 21 Sept 2026
pythonunder a minuteexecuted
Required inputs
  • The CD2S structured export
  • pandas
Expected outputs
  • Contrast between a size-ranked and a capability-ranked selection
  • A transparent fit score favoring under-used resources
  • Blocking limitations read before committing
  • A machine-readable task brief for the next step
  • A chart of the ranked fit scores with the selected cohort highlighted
Steps
  1. Load the structured index
  2. Show what a naive size-ranked selection returns
  3. Filter on measured capability rather than description
  4. Rank on fit, rewarding under-used datasets
  5. Read blocking limitations from the full record
  6. Emit a task brief including what the agent must not do

Start here

Starter code generated from this record’s own identifiers, then the access steps.

Get the data in code

GDC: list open files and download thempython

Open-access files need no account. Controlled files need an approved dbGaP request and a token passed to gdc-client.

import json, requests

PROJECT = "CGCI-HTMCP-CC"
filters = {"op": "and", "content": [
    {"op": "in", "content": {"field": "cases.project.project_id", "value": [PROJECT]}},
    {"op": "in", "content": {"field": "access", "value": ["open"]}},
]}
params = {"filters": json.dumps(filters),
          "fields": "file_id,file_name,data_category,data_type,file_size",
          "size": "10000", "format": "JSON"}
files = requests.get("https://api.gdc.cancer.gov/files", params=params, timeout=60).json()["data"]["hits"]
print(len(files), "open files")

# Write a manifest and fetch with the GDC client (https://gdc.cancer.gov/access-data/gdc-data-transfer-tool)
with open("manifest.txt", "w") as fh:
    fh.write("id\n" + "\n".join(f["file_id"] for f in files))
# $ gdc-client download -m manifest.txt
GDC: clinical table for every casepython
import json, requests

filters = {"op": "in", "content": {"field": "project.project_id", "value": ["CGCI-HTMCP-CC"]}}
params = {"filters": json.dumps(filters), "size": "5000", "format": "TSV",
          "fields": ",".join([
              "submitter_id", "demographic.vital_status", "demographic.days_to_death",
              "diagnoses.days_to_last_follow_up", "diagnoses.ajcc_pathologic_stage",
              "diagnoses.treatments.treatment_type", "diagnoses.treatments.treatment_outcome"])}
tsv = requests.get("https://api.gdc.cancer.gov/cases", params=params, timeout=60).text
open("CGCI-HTMCP-CC_clinical.tsv", "w").write(tsv)
IDC: pull the DICOM collection with idc-indexpython

pip install idc-index. Images are public; the package uses s5cmd under the hood.

from idc_index import IDCClient

COLLECTION = "cgci_htmcp_cc"
client = IDCClient()

series = client.index[client.index["collection_id"] == COLLECTION]   # one row per DICOM series
print(len(series), "series,", series["PatientID"].nunique(), "patients,",
      round(series["series_size_MB"].sum() / 1024, 1), "GB")
print(series["Modality"].value_counts().to_dict())

# Everything above is an index lookup and costs nothing. Uncomment to pull the pixels;
# the client refuses up front if the disk cannot hold them.
# client.download_from_selection(collection_id=COLLECTION, downloadDir="./cgci_htmcp_cc")
This page as data: limitations firstbash
curl -s https://cd2s.vercel.app/data/datasets/gdc-cgci-htmcp-cc.json | python3 -c '
import json, sys
r = json.load(sys.stdin)
for l in r["limitations"]:
    print(l["severity"].upper(), "-", l["statement"][:120])
print("survival endpoint:", r["longitudinal"]["has_survival_endpoint"], "| treatment response:", r["longitudinal"]["has_treatment_response"])'

Access steps

  1. 1
    Read the marker publication firstFor people1 hour

    The Nature Genetics paper describes the recruitment setting, HPV typing approach and the clinical variables that exist outside the harmonized records. It will tell you whether the variables your analysis needs are obtainable at all.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32747824/
  2. 2
    Explore the open-access files without any approvalFor people1-2 hours

    2,457 of 7,160 files are open. Derived expression, copy number and methylation products are enough to scope the analysis and check that the cohort fits before you invest in an access request.

    # Open-access file manifest for this project, no credentials required
    curl -s 'https://api.gdc.cancer.gov/files' \
      --get \
      --data-urlencode 'filters={"op":"and","content":[
        {"op":"in","content":{"field":"cases.project.project_id","value":["CGCI-HTMCP-CC"]}},
        {"op":"in","content":{"field":"access","value":["open"]}}]}' \
      --data-urlencode 'fields=file_id,file_name,data_category,data_type' \
      --data-urlencode 'size=2000&format=TSV' > htmcp_cc_open_files.tsv
    
    https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/projects/CGCI-HTMCP-CC
  3. 3
    Submit a dbGaP data access request for the controlled tierFor peopledays to a few weeks

    Needed for whole genome sequencing and any sequence-level analysis. You will need an eRA Commons account and your institutional signing official. Request the full phenotype file at the same time - that is where stage and HIV-related variables are most likely to live.

    Requires: eRA Commons account, institutional signing official approval

    https://gdc.cancer.gov/access-data/obtaining-access-controlled-data
  4. 4
    Download with the GDC clientFor peoplehours, depending on volume

    Once approved, use the GDC Data Transfer Tool with your token. Do not put the token on a command line or into a script that is committed anywhere.

    https://gdc.cancer.gov/access-data/gdc-data-transfer-tool
  5. 5
    Query the project from code, with no credentialsFor agents

    The file index is public even where files are not, so an agent can size the cohort before anyone requests access.

    curl -s 'https://api.gdc.cancer.gov/files' --get \
      --data-urlencode 'filters={"op":"in","content":{"field":"cases.project.project_id","value":["CGCI-HTMCP-CC"]}}' \
      --data-urlencode 'fields=file_id,file_name,data_type' \
      --data-urlencode 'size=10000' --data-urlencode 'format=TSV'
    https://docs.gdc.cancer.gov/API/Users_Guide/Getting_Started/

    Generated from repository policy. Check the linked policy before downloading.

  6. 6
    Pass the token when the agent needs controlled filesFor agents

    Without a token, an API query may return only the open subset. Compare returned counts with the record before treating them as the whole cohort.

    Requires: GDC authentication token

    curl -H "X-Auth-Token: $GDC_TOKEN" https://api.gdc.cancer.gov/data/<file_id>
    https://docs.gdc.cancer.gov/API/Users_Guide/Getting_Started/

    Generated from repository policy. Check the linked policy before downloading.

Provenance

All of it, and more, is in this record’s JSON.

Identifiers

Versions and verification

Released
1 Jan 2020
Metadata retrieved
18 Sept 2026
Review status
Project-curatedCD2S project curation on 18 Sept 2026
Data generation funding
Funded data generation
Open questions from review
  • HIV status, CD4 count and antiretroviral therapy history are central to this cohort's scientific value but are not exposed as structured fields in the GDC harmonized clinical records. Confirm with the CGCI data access committee whether they are available in the dbGaP phenotype files before planning an HIV-stratified analysis.
  • Stage is unpopulated in GDC for all 212 cases. The marker paper reports stage distribution, so it exists somewhere; confirm whether it can be obtained from the supplementary tables or only through controlled access.

Funding

Awards resolved through NIH RePORTER. Awards that paid to generate these data are listed apart from awards that paid to reuse them. Both are returns on NCI investment, but different ones.

Funded data generation

  • U01CA217842Integrative bioinformatics and functional characterization of oncogenic driver aberrations in cancerBenjamin Deneen, GORDON B. MILLSFY2017-2021API2
  • U01CA096230AIDS and Cancer Specimen Resource Central Office and Data Coordinating CenterMICHAEL Shannon MCGRATHFY2002-2012API2
  • U01CA066535The East Coast AIDS and Cancer Specimen ResourceSYLVIA SILVER, JAN M ORENSTEINFY1994-2012API2
  • P50CA098258MD Anderson Gynecologic SPORE for Uterine CancersRUSSELL R BROADDUS, Karen Hsieh LuFY2003-2020API2

Funded reuse of these data

  • R21CA241013Defining HPV integration sites of unknown significance in invasive cervical cancerJanet S. RaderFY2020API
  • R01CA262198Enlisting HPV integration events to illuminate drivers and target treatment in invasive cervical cancerJanet S. RaderFY2022-2026API

For softwarerecord JSON