Construction of SVM to identify patients with IM. (A) Using DREAM data of the 38 cases from the discovery cohort that were known to belong to consensus HM (n = 30) and consensus IM (n = 8) subgroups, a volcano plot showing DNA methylation fold changes and P values between consensus HM and IM subgroups was constructed. Red dots indicate 35 CpG sites that showed a distinct difference (>0.3) in mean methylation level. (B) To develop an SVM that classified HM and IM, 60% of the samples were randomly assigned to the training data and the remaining 40% to the test data. (C) In the best SVM model, optimal γ, cost parameter, and MSE were 0.0095, 1.05, and 0.1, respectively. (D) Volcano plot shows DNA methylation fold changes and P values between consensus LM (n = 60) and IM (n = 8) subgroups from the discovery cohort. Red dots indicate 12 CpG sites that showed a distinct difference (>0.3) in mean methylation level. (E) To develop an SVM that classified LM and IM, 60% of the samples were randomly assigned to the training data and the remaining 40% to the test data. (F) In the best SVM model, optimal γ, cost parameter, and MSE were 0.0095, 3.02, and 0.05, respectively. (G) Using these SVM models, 3 of the 38 patients in the validation cohort were classified as belonging to the IM subgroup (IM_SVM). Kaplan-Meier curves for OS were presented using data from 37 cases, excluding 1 case of NS/MPD.