Q-omics provides the consensus-scored LY6G6C profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. LY6G6C 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, LY6G6C is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, LY6G6C RNA expression shows 16,207 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight ACC, COAD, and TGCT as cancer lineages where LY6G6C 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 LY6G6C — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes LY6G6C survival associations across molecular data types. LY6G6C RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mass-spec protein abundance (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible LY6G6C RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High LY6G6C expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KIRC, PAAD, COAD and LUAD, but favorable associations in ESCA. 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 LY6G6C RNA expression.
This table summarizes LY6G6C 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 1. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for LY6G6C. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. LY6G6C shows lower tumor expression in KICH and KIRP and higher tumor expression in COAD, THCA, LUSC and BLCA. The COAD box plot shows higher LY6G6C RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +2.482, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with LY6G6C in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, LY6G6C shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, LY6G6C RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
