LSM4 homolog, U6 small nuclear RNA and mRNA degradation associatedGenealiases: GRP · YER112W
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored LSM4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. LSM4 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, LSM4 is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, LSM4 protein abundance shows 30,758 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and HNSC as cancer lineages where LSM4 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 LSM4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes LSM4 survival associations across molecular data types. LSM4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (2) 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 LSM4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High LSM4 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, UVM, LIHC, KICH, LGG and LAML. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for LSM4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes LSM4 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for LSM4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. LSM4 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, BLCA, COAD, LIHC, STAD and LUAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher LSM4 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.205, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with LSM4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, LSM4 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with HNSC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, LSM4 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in CNS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LARGE_INTESTINE and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
