Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PIGA profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PIGA expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PIGA is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, PIGA RNA expression shows 18,398 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Together, these results highlight KIRP, and HNSC as cancer lineages where PIGA 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 PIGA — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PIGA survival associations across molecular data types. PIGA RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), 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 PIGA RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PIGA expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, UVM, LGG, MESO and PAAD, but favorable associations in KIRC. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for PIGA RNA expression.
This table summarizes PIGA 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 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PIGA. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PIGA shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, STAD, LIHC, COAD and CHOL. The HNSC box plot shows higher PIGA RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.641, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PIGA in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PIGA shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with KIRP recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, PIGA RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Myeloma and BLOOD_Leukemia.
