# Question about duplicated measures in PRISM MTS010 screen AUC data

**URL:** <https://forum.depmap.org/t/question-about-duplicated-measures-in-prism-mts010-screen-auc-data/83>\
**Category:** Q&A\
**Tags:** compound-screens, data\
**Created:** [July 15, 2020, 3:12pm UTC](https://forum.depmap.org/t/question-about-duplicated-measures-in-prism-mts010-screen-auc-data/83 "2020-07-15T15:12:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Yu\_Sun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/46a35a/32.png) [@Yu\_Sun](https://forum.depmap.org/u/Yu_Sun)\
**Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 3:12pm UTC](https://forum.depmap.org/t/question-about-duplicated-measures-in-prism-mts010-screen-auc-data/83/1 "2020-07-15T15:12:39Z")

</div>

Dear DepMap developers,

I have downloaded the “secondary-dose-response-curve-parameters.csv” (PRISM 19Q4) data from the portal and noticed that a new screen id “MTS010” has been added to this data set. I noticed that for some broad\_id (drug) and ccle\_name (cell line) combinations, there are duplicated rows in the MTS010 screen. For example : BRD-M97302542-001-04-4 had two AUC values of U2OS\_BONE in the MTS010 screen (0.9164528 and 0.9544448). I’m wondering which value should I use? Thanks!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mustafa\_Kocak](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/forum.depmap.org/mustafa_kocak/32/11_2.png) [@Mustafa\_Kocak](https://forum.depmap.org/u/Mustafa_Kocak)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 5:08pm UTC](https://forum.depmap.org/t/question-about-duplicated-measures-in-prism-mts010-screen-auc-data/83/2 "2020-07-17T17:08:57Z")

</div>

Hi Yu,

As you pointed out, MTS010 data covers two panels of cell lines, PR500 (adherent cell lines, that were also included in the previous screens too), and PR300 (suspension cell lines that are mostly hematopoietic or pediatric lines). These two sets have a small overlap, and U2OS is one of the overlapping lines. Unfortunately, we don’t have pubic documentation for the differences in the assay conditions at this point. Still, in general, I would recommend moving on with PR500 data (should be marked with “…\_PR500” in the row\_id column.