Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ERCC5 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ERCC5 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in MESO. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ERCC5 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, ERCC5 RNA expression shows 19,381 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight MESO, KIRC, and UVM as cancer lineages where ERCC5 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 ERCC5 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ERCC5 survival associations across molecular data types. ERCC5 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ERCC5 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ERCC5 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, OV and COAD, but favorable associations in MESO, BRCA and BLCA. The MESO 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 MESO as the clearest survival context for ERCC5 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ERCC5 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ERCC5. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ERCC5 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and BRCA and higher tumor expression in KIRC, LIHC, KIRP and STAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher ERCC5 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.001, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ERCC5 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ERCC5 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, ERCC5 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
