Fig. 4: Analysis of the WES cohort verifies the superiority of optimal panels in discriminating MLCs.
From: Optimizing the NGS-based discrimination of multiple lung cancers from the perspective of evolution
A Clinical features, discriminating results, and mutational profiles of the 42 patients in WES cohort. The stage was the highest stage among the MLCs when staging all lesions separately. T1, T2, and T3 refer to different tumors of the same MLCs patient. A square consisting of two colors represents that the patient has multiple tumor pairs with different identification results. B Survival analyses stratified by clinic criteria of ACCP criteria. C Survival analyses stratified by CHA. D Survival analyses of patients diagnosed by the 10-genes panel with MoleB. E Survival analyses of patients diagnosed by WES with MoleB. F Summary of survival analyses stratified by different panels with MoleB, subsampled from WES data. G Heatmap of mutations with high frequency in the 10 cases where the 10-genes panel failed to detect mutations. H Typical pathologic manifestations of MPLC and IPM and one ambiguous example of MLCs. I Concordant rates between different discriminating methods (note that the unit here is “tumor pairs”). J Sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing MPLC or IPM of different discriminating methods, with WES MoleB as reference. MLCs multiple lung cancers, MPLC multiple primary lung cancers, IPM intrapulmonary metastasis, WES whole-exome sequencing, MoleA empirical interpretation by counting the shared mutations, MoleB bioinformatic interpretation by calculating the clonal probability based on all the mutations, ACCP American College of Chest Physicians, CHA comprehensive histology assessment.
