centrosomal protein 55Genealiases: C10orf3 · CT111 · MARCH · URCC6
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CEP55 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CEP55 expression is associated with patient survival in 28 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in MESO. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CEP55 is differentially expressed in 17, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, CEP55 RNA expression shows 25,384 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight MESO, HNSC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CEP55 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 CEP55 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CEP55 survival associations across molecular data types. CEP55 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CEP55 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CEP55 expression shows unfavorable associations in MESO, ACC, KIRP, KIRC, KICH and LIHC. The MESO 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 MESO as the clearest survival context for CEP55 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CEP55 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 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CEP55. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CEP55 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, LUAD, BLCA, KIRP and COAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher CEP55 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +2.738, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CEP55 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CEP55 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, CEP55 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in CNS and LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD.
