Extended Data Fig. 5: Clinical implications of VECs.

a. Box plot showing the mean proportions of APLN⁺ Tip^SI in each cancer type between ANT and tumour tissues. Dots represent cancer types (n = 31). b. The median infiltration levels of APLN⁺ Tip^SI in each TCGA cancer type across ANT, stage I/II, and stage III/IV samples. GBM was graded by G2, G3, and G4. PRAD was graded by Gleason score (GS). We performed the two-sided Mann–Whitney U test on the mean infiltration levels of APLN⁺ Tip^SI between stage I/II and ANT samples in each cancer type. Different stages of the same cancer are connected using coloured lines when P < 0.05. c. Heatmap showing the effect of VEC infiltration on OS (right) and PFS (left). d. Variations of VEC infiltration levels following bevacizumab treatment. Boxplots showing differences between pre-treatment responders (R) and non-responders (NR) in UCPH-GBM (N, n = 6, NR, n = 10), KU Leuven-READ (N, n = 6, NR, n = 5), and SYSU-READ (n = 4). e. UMAP plot showing the cell types (left), treatment time points (middle), and patients (right) in SYSU-READ. Table showing the patients’ characteristics. For boxplots, centre line represents median, box limits indicate upper and lower quartiles, and whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range. Statistical analysis was performed using two-sided Mann–Whitney U test (a and d).