Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CCDC151 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CCDC151 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CCDC151 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, CCDC151 RNA expression shows 14,838 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight COAD, KIRC, and THYM as cancer lineages where CCDC151 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 CCDC151 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CCDC151 survival associations across molecular data types. CCDC151 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CCDC151 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CCDC151 expression shows unfavorable associations in COAD, LGG, MESO, ACC and PRAD, but favorable associations in SCLC. The COAD 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 COAD as the clearest survival context for CCDC151 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CCDC151 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CCDC151. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CCDC151 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, LUAD, LUSC and KIRP and higher tumor expression in KICH and BRCA. The KIRC box plot shows higher CCDC151 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.036, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CCDC151 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CCDC151 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CCDC151 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in KIDNEY and SOFT_TISSUE.
