Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PARVA profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PARVA expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCEC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PARVA is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, PARVA protein abundance shows 31,846 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Together, these results highlight UCEC, HNSC, and LUAD as cancer lineages where PARVA 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 PARVA — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PARVA survival associations across molecular data types. PARVA RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (3) 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 PARVA RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PARVA expression shows unfavorable associations in LUSC, LGG and KICH, but favorable associations in UCEC, UVM and KIRC. The UCEC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .002). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UCEC as the clearest survival context for PARVA RNA expression.
This table summarizes PARVA tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PARVA. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PARVA shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, KICH, UCEC, BRCA and THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC. The HNSC box plot shows higher PARVA RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.654, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PARVA in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PARVA shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LUAD recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, PARVA RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BONE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_SCLC and CNS.
