Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CCDC158 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CCDC158 expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CCDC158 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, CCDC158 RNA expression shows 18,343 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, KICH, and THYM as cancer lineages where CCDC158 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 CCDC158 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CCDC158 survival associations across molecular data types. CCDC158 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CCDC158 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CCDC158 expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC, BRCA, SKCM, PAAD and LUAD. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for CCDC158 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CCDC158 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CCDC158. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CCDC158 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, COAD, BRCA, THCA, UCEC and LUSC. The KICH box plot shows higher CCDC158 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.677, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CCDC158 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CCDC158 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, CCDC158 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and LARGE_INTESTINE.
