Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CCDC40 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CCDC40 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, CCDC40 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, CCDC40 RNA expression shows 19,534 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight COAD, and UVM as cancer lineages where CCDC40 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 CCDC40 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CCDC40 survival associations across molecular data types. CCDC40 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (10) 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 CCDC40 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CCDC40 expression shows unfavorable associations in COAD, KIRC, ACC, LGG and BLCA, but favorable associations in BRCA. 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 CCDC40 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CCDC40 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 COAD for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CCDC40. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CCDC40 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, THCA and LUSC and higher tumor expression in COAD, LIHC and KIRP. The COAD box plot shows higher CCDC40 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.481, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CCDC40 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CCDC40 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CCDC40 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in KIDNEY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD and LARGE_INTESTINE.
