Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CCDC22 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CCDC22 expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CCDC22 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, CCDC22 protein abundance shows 25,308 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight LIHC, COAD, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CCDC22 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 CCDC22 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CCDC22 survival associations across molecular data types. CCDC22 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CCDC22 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CCDC22 expression shows unfavorable associations in LIHC, UVM, LGG and LAML, but favorable associations in SCLC and KIRC. The LIHC 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 LIHC as the clearest survival context for CCDC22 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CCDC22 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 7. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CCDC22. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CCDC22 shows higher tumor expression in COAD, KIRC, LIHC, STAD, BRCA and CHOL. The COAD box plot shows higher CCDC22 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.817, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CCDC22 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CCDC22 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, CCDC22 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
