Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CAV3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CAV3 expression is associated with patient survival in 19 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in PAAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CAV3 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, CAV3 RNA expression shows 12,854 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LAML. Together, these results highlight PAAD, LUAD, and LAML as cancer lineages where CAV3 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 CAV3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CAV3 survival associations across molecular data types. CAV3 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (19), followed by mutation status (5) 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 CAV3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CAV3 expression shows unfavorable associations in HNSC, LGG, MESO and ACC, but favorable associations in PAAD and READ. The PAAD Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .003). Together, the overview and detailed table identify PAAD as the clearest survival context for CAV3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CAV3 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in LUAD for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CAV3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CAV3 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD, COAD, LUSC, KIRC, KIRP and BRCA. The LUAD box plot shows higher CAV3 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.181, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CAV3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CAV3 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LAML recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CAV3 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 OESOPHAGUS and SOFT_TISSUE.
