Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CRB2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CRB2 expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CRB2 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Additionally, CRB2 RNA expression shows 14,135 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight HNSC, KIRP, and TGCT as cancer lineages where CRB2 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 CRB2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CRB2 survival associations across molecular data types. CRB2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), followed by mutation status (8) 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 CRB2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CRB2 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, LGG, MESO and OV, but favorable associations in HNSC and LUAD. The HNSC 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 HNSC as the clearest survival context for CRB2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CRB2 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CRB2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CRB2 shows lower tumor expression in KIRP, KIRC, KICH, UCEC, BRCA and LUAD. The KIRP box plot shows higher CRB2 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.122, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CRB2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CRB2 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CRB2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
