Q-omics provides the consensus-scored LTB4R profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. LTB4R expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, LTB4R is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, LTB4R RNA expression shows 18,221 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and KIRC as cancer lineages where LTB4R 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 LTB4R — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes LTB4R survival associations across molecular data types. LTB4R RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible LTB4R RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High LTB4R expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KIRC, KIRP and COAD, but favorable associations in UVM and PAAD. 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 LTB4R RNA expression.
This table summarizes LTB4R tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for LTB4R. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. LTB4R shows higher tumor expression in KIRC, COAD, KIRP, LUSC, READ and BLCA. The KIRC box plot shows higher LTB4R RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.342, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with LTB4R in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, LTB4R shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, LTB4R RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
