EH domain binding protein 1Genealiases: HPC12 · NACSIN
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored EHBP1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. EHBP1 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, EHBP1 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, EHBP1 RNA expression shows 21,777 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and ACC as cancer lineages where EHBP1 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 EHBP1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes EHBP1 survival associations across molecular data types. EHBP1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), 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 EHBP1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High EHBP1 expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, ACC, LUAD, CESC and MESO, but favorable associations in KIRC. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for EHBP1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes EHBP1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for EHBP1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. EHBP1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, UCEC and BRCA and higher tumor expression in KIRC, HNSC and LUSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher EHBP1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.745, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with EHBP1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, EHBP1 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, EHBP1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_SCLC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and BONE.
