Q-omics provides the consensus-scored OMA1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. OMA1 expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LGG. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, OMA1 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, OMA1 RNA expression shows 19,315 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight LGG, KICH, and ACC as cancer lineages where OMA1 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 OMA1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes OMA1 survival associations across molecular data types. OMA1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), followed by mutation status (2) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible OMA1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High OMA1 expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, LIHC and SCLC, but favorable associations in SKCM, LUSC and READ. The LGG 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 LGG as the clearest survival context for OMA1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes OMA1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for OMA1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. OMA1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, KIRC and KIRP and higher tumor expression in LIHC, BRCA and ESCA. The KICH box plot shows higher OMA1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.644, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with OMA1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, OMA1 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, OMA1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LIVER and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
