Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CEP95 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CEP95 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CEP95 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, CEP95 RNA expression shows 20,727 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight ACC, HNSC, and UVM as cancer lineages where CEP95 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 CEP95 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CEP95 survival associations across molecular data types. CEP95 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CEP95 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CEP95 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KIRC, LIHC and KICH, but favorable associations in READ and BRCA. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for CEP95 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CEP95 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CEP95. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CEP95 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, LIHC, COAD and LUAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher CEP95 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.041, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CEP95 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CEP95 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, CEP95 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in KIDNEY and BLOOD_Leukemia.
