Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CSDE1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CSDE1 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CSDE1 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Additionally, CSDE1 RNA expression shows 19,735 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, LIHC, and ACC as cancer lineages where CSDE1 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 CSDE1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CSDE1 survival associations across molecular data types. CSDE1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CSDE1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CSDE1 expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, LIHC, ACC and CESC, but favorable associations in KIRC and UCS. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for CSDE1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CSDE1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CSDE1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CSDE1 shows lower tumor expression in THCA, KICH, BRCA, LUAD and COAD and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The LIHC box plot shows higher CSDE1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.763, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CSDE1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CSDE1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CSDE1 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 BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
