Q-omics provides the consensus-scored OPRD1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. OPRD1 expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, OPRD1 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Additionally, OPRD1 RNA expression shows 15,607 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight UVM, and KIRP as cancer lineages where OPRD1 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 OPRD1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes OPRD1 survival associations across molecular data types. OPRD1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible OPRD1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High OPRD1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRC, LIHC and LUSC, but favorable associations in SCLC and LUAD. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for OPRD1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes OPRD1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for OPRD1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. OPRD1 shows higher tumor expression in KIRP, KIRC, BRCA, UCEC, COAD and LUAD. The KIRP box plot shows higher OPRD1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.266, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with OPRD1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, OPRD1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, OPRD1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in URINARY_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
