Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CCDC65 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CCDC65 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CCDC65 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, CCDC65 RNA expression shows 21,514 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRP, KICH, and UVM as cancer lineages where CCDC65 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 CCDC65 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CCDC65 survival associations across molecular data types. CCDC65 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), 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 CCDC65 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CCDC65 expression shows unfavorable associations in LIHC, LGG, UVM and KICH, but favorable associations in KIRP and HNSC. The KIRP Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRP as the clearest survival context for CCDC65 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CCDC65 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CCDC65. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CCDC65 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, THCA, LUSC and LUAD and higher tumor expression in LIHC and BRCA. The KICH box plot shows higher CCDC65 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.488, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CCDC65 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CCDC65 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, CCDC65 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 BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
