Q-omics provides the consensus-scored DUS2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. DUS2 expression is associated with patient survival in 19 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, DUS2 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, DUS2 RNA expression shows 18,142 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight LIHC, BLCA, and ACC as cancer lineages where DUS2 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 DUS2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes DUS2 survival associations across molecular data types. DUS2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (19), 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 DUS2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High DUS2 expression shows unfavorable associations in LIHC, HNSC and ACC, but favorable associations in SCLC, READ and KIRP. The LIHC 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 LIHC as the clearest survival context for DUS2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes DUS2 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 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for DUS2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. DUS2 shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in BLCA, HNSC, KIRP, KIRC and LIHC. The BLCA box plot shows higher DUS2 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.960, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with DUS2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, DUS2 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, DUS2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in CNS and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
