Q-omics provides the consensus-scored OGDH profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. OGDH expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, OGDH is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in THCA. Additionally, OGDH protein abundance shows 21,617 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, THCA, and GBM as cancer lineages where OGDH 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 OGDH — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes OGDH survival associations across molecular data types. OGDH RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (6) 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 OGDH RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High OGDH expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, UVM and LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC, UCS and KIRP. 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 OGDH RNA expression.
This table summarizes OGDH 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 THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for OGDH. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. OGDH shows lower tumor expression in THCA, COAD, KIRP and KIRC and higher tumor expression in LIHC and CHOL. The THCA box plot shows higher OGDH RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.072, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with OGDH in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, OGDH 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, OGDH RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OVARY and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
