Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PAWR profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PAWR expression is associated with patient survival in 20 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PAWR is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, PAWR protein abundance shows 20,275 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UCEC. Together, these results highlight UVM, HNSC, and UCEC as cancer lineages where PAWR 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 PAWR — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PAWR survival associations across molecular data types. PAWR RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (20), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible PAWR RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PAWR expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, HNSC, MESO, LUAD, LGG and KIRP. 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 PAWR RNA expression.
This table summarizes PAWR tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PAWR. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PAWR shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KICH and UCEC and higher tumor expression in HNSC, STAD and LUSC. The HNSC box plot shows higher PAWR RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.038, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PAWR in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PAWR shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UCEC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, PAWR RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_SCLC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD.
