Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CACNA1C profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CACNA1C expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CACNA1C is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, CACNA1C RNA expression shows 20,398 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRP, HNSC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CACNA1C 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 CACNA1C — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CACNA1C survival associations across molecular data types. CACNA1C RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (11) and mass-spec protein abundance (1). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CACNA1C RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CACNA1C expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, OV, MESO and UVM, but favorable associations in KIRC and HNSC. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for CACNA1C RNA expression.
This table summarizes CACNA1C tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 15, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CACNA1C. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CACNA1C shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, KICH, LUSC and UCEC and higher tumor expression in HNSC and LIHC. The HNSC box plot shows higher CACNA1C RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.640, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CACNA1C in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CACNA1C 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, CACNA1C 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 CNS and BONE.
