Skip to main content
. 2021 May 18;2(5):100276. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100276

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Neoantigen load and immunogenicity of MLH1-deficient tumor

(A–D) The distribution of immune signatures, including (A) TILs, (B) CYT score, (C) PD1, and (D) PD-L1 expression, in cases stratified by MLH1 deficiency (dMLH1), MLH1-WT (wtMLH1), high (h), and low (l) SNV neoantigen load.

(E–H) The distribution of immune signatures, including (E) TILs, (F) CYT score, (G) PD1, and (H) PD-L1 expression, in cases stratified by dMLH1, wtMLH1, h, and l indel neoantigen load. p values were estimated by the 2-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test and FDR corrected. FDR < ∗0.01, ∗∗0.001, and ∗∗∗0.0001. ns, not significant.

(I) Schematic of vectors injected into mice. The transposon-based vector overexpressing MYC and luciferase (Mycluc) or a luciferase fused to model antigens (MyclucOS).

(J) The survival rate of mice in each group shown as well as median survival, including MLH1 WT group (Mycluc p53, n = 7), MLH1− group (Mycluc p53 MLH1, n = 7), MLH1 WT + antigens group (MyclucOS p53, n = 9), and MLH1− + antigens group (MyclucOS p53 MLH1, n = 6). The log-rank Mantel-Cox test was used to calculate the p values.