Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CABP5 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CABP5 expression is associated with patient survival in 14 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CABP5 is differentially expressed in 4, with the highest sampling consensus in LUSC. Additionally, CABP5 protein abundance shows 12,715 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, LUSC, and PDAC as cancer lineages where CABP5 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 CABP5 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CABP5 survival associations across molecular data types. CABP5 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (14), 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 CABP5 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CABP5 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, ACC, UVM, COAD, ESCA and MESO. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for CABP5 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CABP5 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 4, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in LUSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CABP5. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CABP5 shows lower tumor expression in LUSC, LUAD, BRCA and KICH. The LUSC box plot shows higher CABP5 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.100, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CABP5 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CABP5 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CABP5 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
