Skip to main content
. 2020 Sep 22;41(6):1398–1416. doi: 10.1177/0271678X20953912

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Molecular signatures for IS versus VRFC in the sample types analyzed. (a) Venn diagram of the numbers of DEGs in monocytes (green), neutrophils (orange), and whole blood (brown); (b) principal component analyses (PCA) using the DEGs in IS-monocytes versus VRFC-monocytes (left PCA) and IS-neutrophils versus VRFC-neutrophils (right PCA), the effects of additional factors were removed before plotting. (c) Venn diagram of the numbers of over-represented significant canonical pathways (p < 0.05) for IS; (d) common pathways in monocytes and neutrophils. Top enriched pathways are shown for monocytes (e) and neutrophils (f). The asterisk depicts significant pathways that passed additional stringency criteria (Benjamini–Hochberg corrected p-value < 0.05). In the plot, orange cells indicate predicted activation of the pathway, blue ones show predicted inhibition, grey cells – no prediction can be performed, and white depicts no direction can be inferred. The shades for every colored cell represent z-scores values. Arrows represent the direction of the change for significant activation (Z ≥ 2 = activation, up arrow); or significant inhibition (Z ≤ −2, down arrow).