Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CRYAB profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CRYAB expression is associated with patient survival in 28 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CRYAB is differentially expressed in 17, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, CRYAB protein abundance shows 30,724 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight BLCA, KIRC, and GBM as cancer lineages where CRYAB 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 CRYAB — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CRYAB survival associations across molecular data types. CRYAB RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (1) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CRYAB RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CRYAB expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA and UVM, but favorable associations in SKCM, LGG, KIRC and 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 CRYAB RNA expression.
This table summarizes CRYAB tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 17, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CRYAB. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CRYAB shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, THCA, COAD and LUAD and higher tumor expression in KIRC and KIRP. The KIRC box plot shows higher CRYAB RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.546, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CRYAB in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CRYAB 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, CRYAB RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Myeloma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LIVER and BONE.
