Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MICU3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MICU3 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in STAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MICU3 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, MICU3 RNA expression shows 19,762 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight STAD, KIRC, and THYM as cancer lineages where MICU3 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 MICU3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MICU3 survival associations across molecular data types. MICU3 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 MICU3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MICU3 expression shows unfavorable associations in STAD, but favorable associations in PAAD, LUAD, BRCA, LGG and HNSC. The STAD Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .007). Together, the overview and detailed table identify STAD as the clearest survival context for MICU3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes MICU3 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, 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 MICU3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MICU3 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, BLCA, COAD, LUAD, LUSC and UCEC. The KIRC box plot shows higher MICU3 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.656, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MICU3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MICU3 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, MICU3 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LARGE_INTESTINE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and OVARY.
