Q-omics provides the consensus-scored C16orf54 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. C16orf54 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in SKCM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, C16orf54 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, C16orf54 RNA expression shows 23,630 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight SKCM, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where C16orf54 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 C16orf54 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes C16orf54 survival associations across molecular data types. C16orf54 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), 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 C16orf54 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High C16orf54 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM and LGG, but favorable associations in SKCM, HNSC, CESC and UCEC. The SKCM 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 SKCM as the clearest survival context for C16orf54 RNA expression.
This table summarizes C16orf54 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for C16orf54. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. C16orf54 shows lower tumor expression in COAD, LUAD, LUSC, BRCA and UCEC and higher tumor expression in KIRC. The KIRC box plot shows higher C16orf54 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.386, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with C16orf54 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, C16orf54 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, C16orf54 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 BONE and BLOOD_Leukemia.
