Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CYS1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CYS1 expression is associated with patient survival in 19 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CYS1 is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, CYS1 RNA expression shows 18,880 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and BRCA as cancer lineages where CYS1 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 CYS1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CYS1 survival associations across molecular data types. CYS1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (19), followed by mutation status (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CYS1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CYS1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC and STAD, but favorable associations in KIRC, LGG, MESO and THYM. 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 CYS1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CYS1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 15, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CYS1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CYS1 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KICH, COAD, LUAD, LUSC and BLCA. The KIRC box plot shows higher CYS1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.543, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CYS1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CYS1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with BRCA recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CYS1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BONE.
