Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MEDAG profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MEDAG expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in MESO. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MEDAG is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, MEDAG RNA expression shows 21,452 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight MESO, KICH, and LSCC as cancer lineages where MEDAG 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 MEDAG — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MEDAG survival associations across molecular data types. MEDAG RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (4) and 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 MEDAG RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MEDAG expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRP, ACC and LUSC, but favorable associations in MESO and SKCM. The MESO 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 MESO as the clearest survival context for MEDAG RNA expression.
This table summarizes MEDAG 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 KICH for RNA and PDAC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for MEDAG. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MEDAG shows lower tumor expression in KICH, BLCA, UCEC, BRCA and COAD and higher tumor expression in HNSC. The KICH box plot shows higher MEDAG RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.814, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MEDAG in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MEDAG shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, MEDAG 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 BLOOD_Leukemia and SOFT_TISSUE.
