centromere protein CGenealiases: CENP-C · CENPC1 · MIF2 · hcp-4
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CENPC profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CENPC expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CENPC is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in THCA. Additionally, CENPC RNA expression shows 21,841 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, THCA, and ACC as cancer lineages where CENPC 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 CENPC — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CENPC survival associations across molecular data types. CENPC RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (9) 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 CENPC RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CENPC expression shows favorable associations in KIRC, MESO, HNSC, LAML, LUAD and BRCA. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for CENPC RNA expression.
This table summarizes CENPC 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 5. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CENPC. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CENPC shows lower tumor expression in THCA, UCEC, KICH, KIRP and BRCA and higher tumor expression in CHOL. The THCA box plot shows higher CENPC RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.784, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CENPC in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CENPC shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CENPC RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in URINARY_TRACT and LARGE_INTESTINE.
