energy homeostasis associatedGenealiases: C9orf165 · UNQ470
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ENHO profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ENHO expression is associated with patient survival in 28 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ENHO is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, ENHO RNA expression shows 14,305 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight LUAD, COAD, and GBM as cancer lineages where ENHO 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 ENHO — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ENHO survival associations across molecular data types. ENHO RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ENHO RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ENHO expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH, but favorable associations in LUAD, CESC, OV, LGG and PAAD. The LUAD Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .002). Together, the overview and detailed table identify LUAD as the clearest survival context for ENHO RNA expression.
This table summarizes ENHO tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ENHO. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ENHO shows lower tumor expression in COAD, KIRC, LUAD, READ, CHOL and KICH. The COAD box plot shows higher ENHO RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.040, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ENHO in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ENHO 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, ENHO RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OESOPHAGUS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and OVARY.
