Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NIN profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NIN expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NIN is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, NIN RNA expression shows 20,702 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and ACC as cancer lineages where NIN 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 NIN — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NIN survival associations across molecular data types. NIN RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (12) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible NIN RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NIN expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, BLCA, UVM and MESO, but favorable associations in KIRC and UCS. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for NIN RNA expression.
This table summarizes NIN tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NIN. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NIN shows lower tumor expression in KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LIHC, KIRC, KIRP and CHOL. The HNSC box plot shows higher NIN RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.385, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NIN in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NIN shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NIN RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_SCLC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
