ligand of numb-protein X 1Genealiases: LNX · MPDZ · PDZRN2
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored LNX1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. LNX1 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, LNX1 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, LNX1 RNA expression shows 19,829 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and UVM as cancer lineages where LNX1 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 LNX1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes LNX1 survival associations across molecular data types. LNX1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible LNX1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High LNX1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, but favorable associations in KIRC, SCLC, ACC, MESO and THCA. 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 LNX1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes LNX1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 8. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for LNX1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. LNX1 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KIRP and HNSC and higher tumor expression in LUSC, LIHC and LUAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher LNX1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.571, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with LNX1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, LNX1 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, LNX1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and BONE.
