Q-omics provides the consensus-scored DSPP profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. DSPP expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, DSPP is differentially expressed in 7, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, DSPP RNA expression shows 18,040 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight UVM, KIRC, and GBM as cancer lineages where DSPP 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 DSPP — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes DSPP survival associations across molecular data types. DSPP RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible DSPP RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High DSPP expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRC, KICH and CHOL, but favorable associations in UCEC and ESCA. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for DSPP RNA expression.
This table summarizes DSPP tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 7. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for DSPP. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. DSPP shows higher tumor expression in KIRC, HNSC, LUSC, BRCA, LUAD and KIRP. The KIRC box plot shows higher DSPP RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.006, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with DSPP in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, DSPP 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, DSPP RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BONE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
