Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CIT profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CIT expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in MESO. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CIT is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, CIT protein abundance shows 32,102 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight MESO, BLCA, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CIT 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 CIT — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CIT survival associations across molecular data types. CIT RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (11) and mass-spec protein abundance (8). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CIT RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CIT expression shows unfavorable associations in MESO, ACC, LIHC, UVM and PAAD, but favorable associations in KIRC. 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 CIT RNA expression.
This table summarizes CIT tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CIT. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CIT shows higher tumor expression in BLCA, HNSC, COAD, STAD, LUSC and LIHC. The BLCA box plot shows higher CIT RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.968, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CIT in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CIT 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, CIT RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BONE and BLOOD_Leukemia.
