Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CDH3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CDH3 expression is associated with patient survival in 20 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CDH3 is differentially expressed in 17, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, CDH3 protein abundance shows 17,903 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Together, these results highlight KIRP, COAD, and BRCA as cancer lineages where CDH3 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 CDH3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CDH3 survival associations across molecular data types. CDH3 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (20), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CDH3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CDH3 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, SKCM, PAAD and HNSC, but favorable associations in THCA and ESCA. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for CDH3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CDH3 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 17, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 9. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CDH3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CDH3 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC and KIRP and higher tumor expression in COAD, HNSC, THCA and LUSC. The COAD box plot shows higher CDH3 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +5.248, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CDH3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CDH3 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with BRCA recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CDH3 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Lymphoma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD and LARGE_INTESTINE.
