Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ATP6V0D1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ATP6V0D1 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ATP6V0D1 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, ATP6V0D1 protein abundance shows 24,219 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight BLCA, LUAD, and GBM as cancer lineages where ATP6V0D1 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 ATP6V0D1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ATP6V0D1 survival associations across molecular data types. ATP6V0D1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ATP6V0D1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ATP6V0D1 expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, READ, LIHC and LUSC, but favorable associations in KIRC and KIRP. The BLCA Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p < 0.001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify BLCA as the clearest survival context for ATP6V0D1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ATP6V0D1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in LUAD for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ATP6V0D1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ATP6V0D1 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD, THCA, COAD, KICH and KIRC and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The LUAD box plot shows higher ATP6V0D1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.660, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ATP6V0D1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ATP6V0D1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, ATP6V0D1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OESOPHAGUS and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
