Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ANO5 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ANO5 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ANO5 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, ANO5 RNA expression shows 18,830 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight BRCA, KIRC, and UVM as cancer lineages where ANO5 shows reproducible signals across survival, tumor–normal expression, and patient cross-omics analyses.
Every result is evaluated using two consensus scores. Sampling consensus measures how consistently a finding is reproduced within a cancer lineage across different conditions. Lineage consensus measures how broadly the result is shared across cancer types, distinguishing pan-cancer signals from lineage-specific patterns.
Premium analyses for ANO5 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ANO5 survival associations across molecular data types. ANO5 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ANO5 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ANO5 expression shows unfavorable associations in LUSC, THCA, LIHC and STAD, but favorable associations in BRCA and CESC. The BRCA Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p < 0.001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify BRCA as the clearest survival context for ANO5 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ANO5 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ANO5. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ANO5 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, COAD, THCA, BLCA, LUSC and LUAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher ANO5 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.370, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ANO5 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ANO5 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, ANO5 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and BLOOD_Leukemia.
