Figure 2.

(A) The graph depicts mean ± SEM of WT1 transcript expression levels in the Beat AML cohort. The comparison between l+/+ vs. l−/− and l+/− vs. s+/+ does not yield significant differences. However, all other pairwise comparisons demonstrate significant distinctions, with a p-value of <0.0001. (B) The graph depicts a positive correlation between sWT1+/− and sWT1+/+ or sWT1−/+, as indicated by Pearson Correlation tests, from the Beat AML cohort (n=560). (C) Graph depicts the correlation between specific WT1 transcripts within the Beat AML cohort. (D) The graph depicts the correlation between annotated WT1 exons within the BeatAML cohort. The correspondence between WT1 exons and Ensembl IDs is provided in the supplementary file. (E) The graph depicts 95% confidence interval and mean log fold change of different WT1 transcript expression in leukemia samples with and without common mutations from the Beat AML cohort. (F) The graph depicts 95% confidence interval and mean log fold change of WT1 transcript expression in different cytogenetic, FAB, and clinical outcome subgroups (comparing “yes” vs. “no” for indicated parameters). (G) The graph depicts the distribution of p-values for differential exon expression in WT1 with and without common mutations and separates the distributions by the sign of the log fold change (effect size) when applicable. (H) The graph illustrates a strong consistency in Spearman correlation (r) values between WT1 and all other genes in the TCGA and Beat AML cohorts. (I) Graphs depict positive correlations between WT1 and GATA2/RUNX1 as indicated by Pearson Correlation tests, from the Beat AML (n=493) and TCGA cohort (n=165). (J) Graphs depict mutual exclusive mutation patterns of WT1, RUNX1, and GATA2 mutations in AML/MDS cohorts.