Q-omics provides the consensus-scored BIN1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. BIN1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, BIN1 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, BIN1 protein abundance shows 34,508 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight UVM, BLCA, and GBM as cancer lineages where BIN1 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 BIN1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes BIN1 survival associations across molecular data types. BIN1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (11) and mass-spec protein abundance (10). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible BIN1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High BIN1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, LUAD, LIHC, BLCA and CESC, but favorable associations in KIRP. The UVM Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UVM as the clearest survival context for BIN1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes BIN1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 8. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for BIN1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. BIN1 shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, THCA, LUSC, KICH and BRCA and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The BLCA box plot shows higher BIN1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.385, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with BIN1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, BIN1 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, BIN1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in STOMACH and BREAST.
