Fig 1: Associations between the EME and genomic alterations, potential therapeutic compounds and druggable targets in HCC. A-D Comparison of aneuploidy score, CTA score, HRD score, and intratumor heterogeneity in the low- and high-EME patients. E, F CNVs in the low- and high-EME patients. G, H Differences in FGA, FGG, and FGL between the high- and low-EME patients. I The top twenty mutated genes across HCC patients stratified by the EME. J, K Spearman correlation analysis on the EME with AUC of CTRP- and PRISM-derived compounds (left), and comparison of AUC between the low- and high-EME subsets (right). L Potential working mechanisms of the identified compounds. M Spearman’s correlation on the protein expression of compound targets and the EME. Blue dot represents a significant positive correlation (p-value < 0.05 and Spearman’s r > 0.4). N Spearman’s correlation on the CERES score of druggable targets and the EME. Red dot denotes a significant negative correlation (p-value < 0.05 and Spearman’s r < -0.45). O-S Western blot for the expression of TUBB1 and P2RY4 in the presence or absence of si-DNMT1 or si-METTL3 in HepG2 and Huh-7 cells. Ns: no significance; *p-value < 0.05; **p-value < 0.01; ***p-value < 0.001; ****p-value < 0.0001