Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CRMP1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CRMP1 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CRMP1 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, CRMP1 protein abundance shows 33,859 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight BLCA, KICH, and GBM as cancer lineages where CRMP1 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 CRMP1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CRMP1 survival associations across molecular data types. CRMP1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (6) 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 CRMP1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CRMP1 expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, ACC, MESO, UVM and HNSC, but favorable associations in KIRP. The BLCA 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 BLCA as the clearest survival context for CRMP1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CRMP1 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 8. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CRMP1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CRMP1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, UCEC, LUAD and BRCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC and LIHC. The KICH box plot shows higher CRMP1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.980, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CRMP1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CRMP1 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, CRMP1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and LUNG_SCLC.
