Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CYSTM1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CYSTM1 expression is associated with patient survival in 28 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CYSTM1 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, CYSTM1 RNA expression shows 17,808 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight ACC, KIRC, and GBM as cancer lineages where CYSTM1 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 CYSTM1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CYSTM1 survival associations across molecular data types. CYSTM1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (2) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CYSTM1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CYSTM1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UCS, UVM, LGG and SCLC, but favorable associations in ACC and MESO. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for CYSTM1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CYSTM1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CYSTM1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CYSTM1 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KIRP, LUSC, LUAD and KICH and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The KIRC box plot shows higher CYSTM1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.907, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CYSTM1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CYSTM1 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, CYSTM1 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 CNS and BLOOD_Leukemia.
