Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CASP1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CASP1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in MESO. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CASP1 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, CASP1 protein abundance shows 28,361 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight MESO, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CASP1 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 CASP1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CASP1 survival associations across molecular data types. CASP1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CASP1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CASP1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, LGG and LAML, but favorable associations in MESO, READ and COAD. The MESO 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 MESO as the clearest survival context for CASP1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CASP1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 9. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CASP1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CASP1 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD, KICH and LUSC and higher tumor expression in KIRC, HNSC and KIRP. The KIRC box plot shows higher CASP1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.910, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CASP1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CASP1 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, CASP1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUSC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BLOOD_Leukemia.
