Fig. 2: Inferred mutational signatures and their contributions in Chinese ccRCC patients.

a ‘Lego’ plots display the frequency of 96 subtypes of base substitutions in Chinese ccRCC (left) and TCGA ccRCC (right). b Identifying the number of processes operating in a set of 152 ccRCC samples based on the reproducibility of their signatures and average Frobenius reconstruction error. c Three mutational signatures deciphered from the base substitutions identified in 152 ccRCC genomes. d The mutational burden was associated with the AA signature, and patients in the AA signature group had a heavier mutation load. The box plot displays the first and third quartiles (top and bottom of the boxes), the median (band inside the boxes), and the lowest and highest point within 1.5 times the interquartile range of the lower and higher quartile (whiskers). Wilcoxon rank-sum test, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. e The somatic mutation load was positively associated with the contribution of the AA signature (Pearson’s correlation coefficient, two-tailed t test). f Contributions of each mutational signature per sample. The upper heat map shows sample gender information, tumor stage, mSigAct results, and the mutation landscape of 11 genes. The source data underlying Figs. 2c–f are provided as a Source Data file.