Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PPDPF profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PPDPF expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PPDPF is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Additionally, PPDPF protein abundance shows 21,448 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Together, these results highlight HNSC, KIRP, and LUAD as cancer lineages where PPDPF 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 PPDPF — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PPDPF survival associations across molecular data types. PPDPF RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (9). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible PPDPF RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PPDPF expression shows unfavorable associations in HNSC, LGG, LUSC, LAML, UCS and THCA. The HNSC 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 HNSC as the clearest survival context for PPDPF RNA expression.
This table summarizes PPDPF tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRP for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PPDPF. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PPDPF shows higher tumor expression in KIRP, BRCA, CHOL, LIHC, PAAD and KIRC. The KIRP box plot shows higher PPDPF RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.672, t-test p = .001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PPDPF in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PPDPF 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, PPDPF RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BONE and CNS.
