Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NUDCD3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NUDCD3 expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in CESC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NUDCD3 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, NUDCD3 protein abundance shows 22,378 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight CESC, COAD, and PDAC as cancer lineages where NUDCD3 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 NUDCD3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NUDCD3 survival associations across molecular data types. NUDCD3 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (11). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible NUDCD3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NUDCD3 expression shows unfavorable associations in CESC, PAAD, KICH and MESO, but favorable associations in CHOL and KIRC. The CESC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .003). Together, the overview and detailed table identify CESC as the clearest survival context for NUDCD3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes NUDCD3 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 8. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NUDCD3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NUDCD3 shows lower tumor expression in UCEC and higher tumor expression in COAD, KIRP, KIRC, LIHC and HNSC. The COAD box plot shows higher NUDCD3 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.976, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NUDCD3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NUDCD3 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NUDCD3 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in CNS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and LARGE_INTESTINE.
