Q-omics provides the consensus-scored GLDC profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. GLDC expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCEC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, GLDC is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, GLDC RNA expression shows 15,505 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight UCEC, KIRC, and TGCT as cancer lineages where GLDC 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 GLDC — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes GLDC survival associations across molecular data types. GLDC RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible GLDC RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High GLDC expression shows unfavorable associations in UCEC, UCS, STAD and MESO, but favorable associations in SCLC and KIRP. The UCEC 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 UCEC as the clearest survival context for GLDC RNA expression.
This table summarizes GLDC 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for GLDC. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. GLDC shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KICH and THCA and higher tumor expression in LUAD, LUSC and UCEC. The KIRC box plot shows higher GLDC RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.796, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with GLDC in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, GLDC shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, GLDC 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_Myeloma and BLOOD_Leukemia.
