developmentally regulated GTP binding protein 2Genealiases: []
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored DRG2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. DRG2 expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in SCLC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, DRG2 is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, DRG2 RNA expression shows 19,374 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Together, these results highlight SCLC, HNSC, and KIRP as cancer lineages where DRG2 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 DRG2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes DRG2 survival associations across molecular data types. DRG2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (4) 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 DRG2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High DRG2 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, HNSC and COAD, but favorable associations in SCLC, ESCA and BRCA. The SCLC 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 SCLC as the clearest survival context for DRG2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes DRG2 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 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for DRG2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. DRG2 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, COAD, LIHC and CHOL. The HNSC box plot shows higher DRG2 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.538, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with DRG2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, DRG2 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with KIRP recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, DRG2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and BLOOD_Leukemia.
