Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PINK1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PINK1 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PINK1 is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, PINK1 RNA expression shows 19,955 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, COAD, and GBM as cancer lineages where PINK1 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 PINK1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PINK1 survival associations across molecular data types. PINK1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible PINK1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PINK1 expression shows unfavorable associations in LUSC, HNSC and BRCA, but favorable associations in KIRC, COAD and SCLC. The KIRC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p < 0.001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRC as the clearest survival context for PINK1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes PINK1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PINK1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PINK1 shows lower tumor expression in COAD, KIRP, HNSC, KICH, KIRC and READ. The COAD box plot shows higher PINK1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.303, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PINK1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PINK1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, PINK1 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 SOFT_TISSUE and LUNG_NSCLC_LUSC.
