Q-omics provides the consensus-scored HUS1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. HUS1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in CESC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, HUS1 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, HUS1 protein abundance shows 20,970 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight CESC, HNSC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where HUS1 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 HUS1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes HUS1 survival associations across molecular data types. HUS1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (10). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible HUS1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High HUS1 expression shows unfavorable associations in CESC, UVM, KICH, BLCA, LGG and LIHC. The CESC 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 CESC as the clearest survival context for HUS1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes HUS1 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 6. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for HUS1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. HUS1 shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, BLCA, LUAD, LIHC and UCEC. The HNSC box plot shows higher HUS1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.825, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with HUS1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, HUS1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, HUS1 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 UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BLOOD_Leukemia.
