Q-omics provides the consensus-scored DUS3L profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. DUS3L expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, DUS3L is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, DUS3L RNA expression shows 18,807 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and COAD as cancer lineages where DUS3L 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 DUS3L — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes DUS3L survival associations across molecular data types. DUS3L RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (6) 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 DUS3L RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High DUS3L expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, MESO, KICH, LUAD and UCS, but favorable associations in HNSC. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for DUS3L RNA expression.
This table summarizes DUS3L tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for DUS3L. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. DUS3L shows higher tumor expression in COAD, KIRC, STAD, LIHC, KIRP and HNSC. The COAD box plot shows higher DUS3L RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.639, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with DUS3L in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, DUS3L 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, DUS3L 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 LARGE_INTESTINE and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
