Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NRP1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NRP1 expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in STAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NRP1 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, NRP1 protein abundance shows 23,050 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Together, these results highlight STAD, KIRC, and BRCA as cancer lineages where NRP1 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 NRP1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NRP1 survival associations across molecular data types. NRP1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible NRP1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NRP1 expression shows unfavorable associations in STAD, ACC, CESC and UVM, but favorable associations in KIRC and LUAD. The STAD 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 STAD as the clearest survival context for NRP1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes NRP1 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 7. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NRP1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NRP1 shows lower tumor expression in LUSC and UCEC and higher tumor expression in KIRC, HNSC, LIHC and STAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher NRP1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.432, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NRP1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NRP1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with BRCA recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NRP1 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 CNS and BONE.
