Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CCR4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CCR4 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CCR4 is differentially expressed in 6, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, CCR4 RNA expression shows 20,904 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight HNSC, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CCR4 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 CCR4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CCR4 survival associations across molecular data types. CCR4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CCR4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CCR4 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, but favorable associations in HNSC, SKCM, KIRC, LUAD and BRCA. The HNSC 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 HNSC as the clearest survival context for CCR4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CCR4 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CCR4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CCR4 shows lower tumor expression in LUSC and KICH and higher tumor expression in KIRC, BRCA, STAD and ESCA. The KIRC box plot shows higher CCR4 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.070, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CCR4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CCR4 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, CCR4 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 OESOPHAGUS and BLOOD_Leukemia.
