Relative frequencies of non-coding mutation contexts in different cancer types. (top panel) Three cancer types with the largest number of mutation calls exhibit different mutation signatures. (bottom panel) Overall comparison of non-coding mutation signatures in 10 cancer types. The samples with lower numbers of total mutation calls display extreme contexts distributions. Cancer types are sorted by the total number of mutation calls. Mutations are grouped by the substitution (Xâ>âY), the 5' and 3' nucleotides are shown in a lexicographical order. (PDF 246 kb
Figure S1. Significantly mutated genes in 302 ESCC. The samples are sorted by the counts of somatic ...
Figure S1. Profiling the SNPs in cancer-related genes and other genes. a Exonic SNP density in cance...
Figure S1. The correlations of TMB value between panel sequencing and WES in published databases. Fi...
Log10 of total mutations per genome, ordered by median mutations within each tumour type. Figure S2:...
Raw data on binding sites predictions across mutation-centered windows in all evaluated cancer data ...
a Mutational signatures for each sample in the discovery set. b Mutational signatures found in the d...
Frequency of indels and non-indels in each MAF dataset. Distribution of mutation frequency across MA...
Figure S1. Comparison of somatic mutation frequency between IBC and non-IBC in four subgroups. (a) T...
The percentage of different mutational subtypes across all defined hotspot mutations. On each hotspo...
The relationship between the proportion of CpG sites and the mutation densities. Proportion of CpGs ...
Figure S1. Test of the Poisson distribution of nonsense mutations in URA3. Figure S2. The effect of ...
The relationship between the number of potential sites for a given type of mutations and the number ...
(top) UMAP representation of the 2708 WGS samples from PCAWG, according to their exposure to the mut...
Section S1POLE mutation patterns in colon cancer samples. Section S2 Detailed forward model selectio...
Table S1. Comparison of regulatory T cell marker genes expression levels between the lower-TMB and t...
Figure S1. Significantly mutated genes in 302 ESCC. The samples are sorted by the counts of somatic ...
Figure S1. Profiling the SNPs in cancer-related genes and other genes. a Exonic SNP density in cance...
Figure S1. The correlations of TMB value between panel sequencing and WES in published databases. Fi...
Log10 of total mutations per genome, ordered by median mutations within each tumour type. Figure S2:...
Raw data on binding sites predictions across mutation-centered windows in all evaluated cancer data ...
a Mutational signatures for each sample in the discovery set. b Mutational signatures found in the d...
Frequency of indels and non-indels in each MAF dataset. Distribution of mutation frequency across MA...
Figure S1. Comparison of somatic mutation frequency between IBC and non-IBC in four subgroups. (a) T...
The percentage of different mutational subtypes across all defined hotspot mutations. On each hotspo...
The relationship between the proportion of CpG sites and the mutation densities. Proportion of CpGs ...
Figure S1. Test of the Poisson distribution of nonsense mutations in URA3. Figure S2. The effect of ...
The relationship between the number of potential sites for a given type of mutations and the number ...
(top) UMAP representation of the 2708 WGS samples from PCAWG, according to their exposure to the mut...
Section S1POLE mutation patterns in colon cancer samples. Section S2 Detailed forward model selectio...
Table S1. Comparison of regulatory T cell marker genes expression levels between the lower-TMB and t...
Figure S1. Significantly mutated genes in 302 ESCC. The samples are sorted by the counts of somatic ...
Figure S1. Profiling the SNPs in cancer-related genes and other genes. a Exonic SNP density in cance...
Figure S1. The correlations of TMB value between panel sequencing and WES in published databases. Fi...