Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CERS6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CERS6 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, CERS6 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, CERS6 RNA expression shows 20,690 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight ACC, HNSC, and UVM as cancer lineages where CERS6 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 CERS6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CERS6 survival associations across molecular data types. CERS6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CERS6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CERS6 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, UVM, LIHC, MESO and HNSC, but favorable associations in KIRC. 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 CERS6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CERS6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CERS6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CERS6 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, LUAD, LUSC, LIHC, BRCA and BLCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher CERS6 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.276, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CERS6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CERS6 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, CERS6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_SCLC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OESOPHAGUS and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
