Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CXCL1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CXCL1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in CESC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CXCL1 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, CXCL1 RNA expression shows 20,238 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight CESC, COAD, and GBM as cancer lineages where CXCL1 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 CXCL1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CXCL1 survival associations across molecular data types. CXCL1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (2) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CXCL1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CXCL1 expression shows unfavorable associations in CESC, KIRC and UVM, but favorable associations in MESO, COAD and LUSC. The CESC 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 CESC as the clearest survival context for CXCL1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CXCL1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CXCL1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CXCL1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and BRCA and higher tumor expression in COAD, STAD, ESCA and READ. The COAD box plot shows higher CXCL1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +2.926, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CXCL1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CXCL1 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, CXCL1 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 BLOOD_Leukemia and SOFT_TISSUE.
