Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NIPSNAP1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NIPSNAP1 expression is associated with patient survival in 20 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NIPSNAP1 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, NIPSNAP1 protein abundance shows 24,329 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRP, HNSC, and GBM as cancer lineages where NIPSNAP1 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 NIPSNAP1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NIPSNAP1 survival associations across molecular data types. NIPSNAP1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (20), 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 NIPSNAP1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NIPSNAP1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, PAAD and BLCA, but favorable associations in KIRP, KIRC and SCLC. The KIRP Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRP as the clearest survival context for NIPSNAP1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes NIPSNAP1 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 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NIPSNAP1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NIPSNAP1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LUAD, COAD, BLCA and LUSC. The HNSC box plot shows higher NIPSNAP1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.212, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NIPSNAP1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NIPSNAP1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NIPSNAP1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and BLOOD_Leukemia.
