G protein-coupled receptor 160Genealiases: GPCR1 · GPCR150
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored GPR160 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. GPR160 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, GPR160 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, GPR160 RNA expression shows 20,273 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and LUAD as cancer lineages where GPR160 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 GPR160 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes GPR160 survival associations across molecular data types. GPR160 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible GPR160 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High GPR160 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC and MESO, but favorable associations in KIRC, BLCA, LUSC and SKCM. 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 GPR160 RNA expression.
This table summarizes GPR160 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for GPR160. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. GPR160 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, THCA, KIRP and LUSC and higher tumor expression in UCEC and BRCA. The KIRC box plot shows higher GPR160 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.515, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with GPR160 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, GPR160 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LUAD recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, GPR160 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SOFT_TISSUE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and BREAST.
