Q-omics provides the consensus-scored LYPD6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. LYPD6 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, LYPD6 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, LYPD6 RNA expression shows 16,911 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight KIRP, KIRC, and TGCT as cancer lineages where LYPD6 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 LYPD6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes LYPD6 survival associations across molecular data types. LYPD6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (1). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible LYPD6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High LYPD6 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, ACC and MESO, but favorable associations in BRCA, BLCA and HNSC. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for LYPD6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes LYPD6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for LYPD6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. LYPD6 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, THCA and KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, COAD and LUSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher LYPD6 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.775, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with LYPD6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, LYPD6 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, LYPD6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BONE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE.
