Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MRPS6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MRPS6 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MRPS6 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Additionally, MRPS6 protein abundance shows 20,902 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight UVM, KIRP, and LSCC as cancer lineages where MRPS6 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 MRPS6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MRPS6 survival associations across molecular data types. MRPS6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (1) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible MRPS6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MRPS6 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRP, LIHC and SCLC, but favorable associations in BLCA and SKCM. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for MRPS6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes MRPS6 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 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for MRPS6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MRPS6 shows lower tumor expression in KIRP, KIRC and KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LUAD and ESCA. The KIRP box plot shows higher MRPS6 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.133, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MRPS6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MRPS6 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, MRPS6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Lymphoma and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
