Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CIRBP profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CIRBP expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CIRBP is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, CIRBP protein abundance shows 39,857 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, LUAD, and GBM as cancer lineages where CIRBP 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 CIRBP — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CIRBP survival associations across molecular data types. CIRBP RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (12). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CIRBP RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CIRBP expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH, but favorable associations in KIRC, BRCA, PAAD, UCEC and UVM. 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 CIRBP RNA expression.
This table summarizes CIRBP tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 12. The strongest signals are observed in LUAD for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CIRBP. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CIRBP shows lower tumor expression in LUAD, BLCA, LUSC, KIRP and UCEC and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The LUAD box plot shows higher CIRBP RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.023, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CIRBP in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CIRBP shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CIRBP RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUSC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in URINARY_TRACT and BONE.
