carboxypeptidase N subunit 1Genealiases: CPN · SCPN
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CPN1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CPN1 expression is associated with patient survival in 19 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LUSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CPN1 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, CPN1 protein abundance shows 20,920 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight LUSC, KICH, and LSCC as cancer lineages where CPN1 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 CPN1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CPN1 survival associations across molecular data types. CPN1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (19), followed by mutation status (5) 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 CPN1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CPN1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, BRCA and DLBC, but favorable associations in LUSC, OV and UCEC. The LUSC 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 LUSC as the clearest survival context for CPN1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CPN1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 8. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CPN1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CPN1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, CHOL and LIHC and higher tumor expression in COAD, HNSC and LUSC. The KICH box plot shows higher CPN1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.530, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CPN1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CPN1 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, CPN1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in URINARY_TRACT and LARGE_INTESTINE.
