Figure 4.
Clonal architecture analysis. (A) For distinction between ancestral and subclonal mutations, VAF (adjusted for copy number and zygosity) were compared and the largest clone was deemed founder. Pie chart shows the frequency of dominant (n = 12), sole dominant (n = 8), and subclonal (n = 32) CUX1 mutations. (B) Bar charts show the frequency of secondary hits in dominant CUX1MT (left panel) and the frequency of first hits in subclonal CUX1MT (right panel). (C) Bar charts show the disease type of the patients harboring dominant and subclonal CUX1MT (left panel) and the median VAF percentage in dominant and subclonal CUX1MT (right panel). The Student t test was used to compare the median VAFs between dominant and subclonal CUX1MT (P = .01). P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Clonal architecture analysis. (A) For distinction between ancestral and subclonal mutations, VAF (adjusted for copy number and zygosity) were compared and the largest clone was deemed founder. Pie chart shows the frequency of dominant (n = 12), sole dominant (n = 8), and subclonal (n = 32) CUX1 mutations. (B) Bar charts show the frequency of secondary hits in dominant CUX1MT (left panel) and the frequency of first hits in subclonal CUX1MT (right panel). (C) Bar charts show the disease type of the patients harboring dominant and subclonal CUX1MT (left panel) and the median VAF percentage in dominant and subclonal CUX1MT (right panel). The Student t test was used to compare the median VAFs between dominant and subclonal CUX1MT (P = .01). P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal