Fig. 7

Platinum adduct distribution is altered in the PEO4 platinum resistant cell line. a Heatmap of Pt-exo-seq coverage in differentially damaged windows, for PEO1 and PEO4. 1170 1 Kb windows showing mean log2FC in Pt-exo-seq signal > ± 2 and FDR < 0.05, between 16 µM cisplatin treated PEO1 replicates and 32 µM treated PEO4 replicates (5 h treatment). Dendrogram shows result of unsupervised hierarchical clustering of samples by Spearman’s correlation coefficients. Blocks on left show separation of windows into those showing either increased or decreased damaged in PEO4. b Chromatin accessibility in windows showing more or less platinum adduct formation in PEO4 compared to PEO1. PEO1 cells were treated with 16 µM cisplatin and PEO4 treated with 32 µM for 5 h. Difference in means: Decreased damage = 0.5, Increased damage = 0.90 (***p < 0.001, Wilcoxon test). c Enrichment for classes of genomic elements in windows showing differential damage between PEO1 cells treated with 16 µM cisplatin and PEO4 treated with 32 µM for 5 h. Odds ratios for only genomic classes showing significant enrichment (p < 0.05) in sets of windows showing increased or decreased damage in PEO4 compare to PEO1. Error bars show 95% confidence interval (Fisher’s exact test).