Q-omics provides the consensus-scored BRD4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. BRD4 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, BRD4 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, BRD4 protein abundance shows 25,221 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight ACC, HNSC, and GBM as cancer lineages where BRD4 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 BRD4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes BRD4 survival associations across molecular data types. BRD4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible BRD4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High BRD4 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KICH, MESO and LGG, but favorable associations in BRCA and HNSC. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for BRD4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes BRD4 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for BRD4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. BRD4 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, STAD, COAD, LIHC, LUSC and BRCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher BRD4 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.061, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with BRD4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, BRD4 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, BRD4 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in CNS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and BLOOD_Leukemia.
