Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MLPH profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MLPH expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCEC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MLPH is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, MLPH protein abundance shows 24,106 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight UCEC, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where MLPH 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 MLPH — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MLPH survival associations across molecular data types. MLPH RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible MLPH RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MLPH expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, KIRP and GBM, but favorable associations in UCEC, BRCA and BLCA. The UCEC 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 UCEC as the clearest survival context for MLPH RNA expression.
This table summarizes MLPH tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for MLPH. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MLPH shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, LUSC, HNSC and LUAD and higher tumor expression in BRCA and STAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher MLPH RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.696, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MLPH in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MLPH 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, MLPH 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 LIVER and BREAST.
