Q-omics provides the consensus-scored C16orf91 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. C16orf91 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, C16orf91 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, C16orf91 RNA expression shows 18,337 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight UVM, HNSC, and ACC as cancer lineages where C16orf91 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 C16orf91 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes C16orf91 survival associations across molecular data types. C16orf91 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (3) 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 C16orf91 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High C16orf91 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, BRCA, ACC, LIHC, SKCM and 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 C16orf91 RNA expression.
This table summarizes C16orf91 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 LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for C16orf91. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. C16orf91 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, COAD, KIRP, LIHC, KIRC and LUAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher C16orf91 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.638, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with C16orf91 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, C16orf91 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, C16orf91 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_SCLC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BONE and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
