(Cell Reports 23, 313–326; April 3, 2018) In the originally published version of this article, the author list contained two errors. Specifically, David J. Kwiatkowski was misspelled as David J. Kwaitkowski, and William Y. Kim was inadvertently written as William T. Kim. Both names have been corrected online. The authors regret this error.

(Immunity 48, 812–830.e1–e14; April 17, 2018) In the originally published version of this article, the authors neglected to include Younes Mokrab and Aaron M. Newman as co-authors and misspelled the names of authors Charles S. Rabkin and Ilya Shmulevich. The author names have been corrected here and online. In addition, the concluding sentence of the subsection “Immune Signature Compilation” in the Method Details in the original published article was deemed unclear because it did not specify differences among the gene set scoring methods. The concluding sentences now reads “Gene sets from Bindea et al., Senbabaoglu et al., and the MSigDB C7 collection were scored using single-sample gene set enrichment (ssGSEA) analysis (Barbie et al., 2009), as implemented in the GSVA R package (Hänzelmann et al., 2013). All other signatures were scored using methods found in the associated citations.”

(Cell 173, 371–385.e1–e9; April 5, 2018) It has come to our attention that we made two errors in preparation of this manuscript. First, in the STAR Methods, under the subheading of “Hypermutators and Immune Infiltrates” within the “Quantification and Statistical Analysis” section, we inadvertently referred to Figures S7A–S7C for data corresponding to sample stratification by hypermutator status alone in the last sentence. It should have referred to Figure S6A–S6C. Second, the lists of highly frequent missense mutations for COAD (colon adenocarcinoma) and READ (rectum adenocarcinoma) displayed in Figure S7 were incorrect because when we ordered the mutations in the initial analysis, we mistakenly combined the two cancer types COAD and READ for analysis, despite the fact that they were listed as two separate cancer types in the x-axis of the figure. After re-ordering the mutations by frequency for COAD and READ independently, information on highly frequent missense mutations for each of these cancer types is different and updated now in the revised Figure S7. These errors don't change the major conclusions of the paper and have been corrected online. We apologize for any confusion they may have caused. [Figure-presented]

The role of enhancers, a key class of non-coding regulatory DNA elements, in cancer development has increasingly been appreciated. Here, we present the detection and characterization of a large number of expressed enhancers in a genome-wide analysis of 8928 tumor samples across 33 cancer types using TCGA RNA-seq data. Compared with matched normal tissues, global enhancer activation was observed in most cancers. Across cancer types, global enhancer activity was positively associated with aneuploidy, but not mutation load, suggesting a hypothesis centered on "chromatin-state" to explain their interplay. Integrating eQTL, mRNA co-expression, and Hi-C data analysis, we developed a computational method to infer causal enhancer-gene interactions, revealing enhancers of clinically actionable genes. Having identified an enhancer ∼140 kb downstream of PD-L1, a major immunotherapy target, we validated it experimentally. This study provides a systematic view of enhancer activity in diverse tumor contexts and suggests the clinical implications of enhancers.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is not a single disease, but several histologically defined cancers with different genetic drivers, clinical courses, and therapeutic responses. The current study evaluated 843 RCC from the three major histologic subtypes, including 488 clear cell RCC, 274 papillary RCC, and 81 chromophobe RCC. Comprehensive genomic and phenotypic analysis of the RCC subtypes reveals distinctive features of each subtype that provide the foundation for the development of subtype-specific therapeutic and management strategies for patients affected with these cancers. Somatic alteration of BAP1, PBRM1, and PTEN and altered metabolic pathways correlated with subtype-specific decreased survival, while CDKN2A alteration, increased DNA hypermethylation, and increases in the immune-related Th2 gene expression signature correlated with decreased survival within all major histologic subtypes. CIMP-RCC demonstrated an increased immune signature, and a uniform and distinct metabolic expression pattern identified a subset of metabolically divergent (MD) ChRCC that associated with extremely poor survival.