chromosome 16 open reading frame 86Genealiases: []
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored C16orf86 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. C16orf86 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, C16orf86 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, C16orf86 RNA expression shows 16,533 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight KIRP, KICH, and TGCT as cancer lineages where C16orf86 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 C16orf86 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes C16orf86 survival associations across molecular data types. C16orf86 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible C16orf86 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High C16orf86 expression shows favorable associations in KIRP, UVM, HNSC, KIRC, LUAD and SARC. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for C16orf86 RNA expression.
This table summarizes C16orf86 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for C16orf86. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. C16orf86 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, THCA, LUAD, LUSC, UCEC and BLCA. The KICH box plot shows higher C16orf86 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.090, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with C16orf86 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, C16orf86 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, C16orf86 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LARGE_INTESTINE and SOFT_TISSUE.
