Logo of ncommsLink to Publisher's site
PMC full text:
Copyright/LicenseRequest permission to reuse

Fig. 2

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is 41467_2024_53711_Fig2_HTML.jpg
A comparison of signature fitting methods on heterogeneous cohorts.

Mean fitting error (a) and precision and sensitivity (b) for different numbers of mutations per sample (columns) for the evaluated fitting tools. The results are averaged over 50 cohorts with 100 samples for eight distinct cancer types (see Methods). Each tool used all 67 COSMICv3 signatures as the reference catalog. The best-performing tool in each panel is marked with a frame (in the bottom row, the best tool by the F1 score combining precision and sensitivity; the dashed contours correspond to F1 = 0.9, 0.8, … ). Results are not shown for SigsPack, YAPSA, and all three variants of sigminer as they are close (fitting error correlation above 0.999) to the results of MutationalPatterns.

Images in this article

  • Fig. 1
  • Fig. 2
  • Fig. 3
  • Fig. 4
Click on the image to see a larger version.