Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PRDM6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PRDM6 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PRDM6 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, PRDM6 RNA expression shows 20,214 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight UVM, BLCA, and PDAC as cancer lineages where PRDM6 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 PRDM6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PRDM6 survival associations across molecular data types. PRDM6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (2) and mass-spec protein abundance (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible PRDM6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PRDM6 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRP, ACC, LGG, THCA and KICH. The UVM Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UVM as the clearest survival context for PRDM6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes PRDM6 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 BLCA for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PRDM6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PRDM6 shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, LUSC, THCA, LUAD, COAD and READ. The BLCA box plot shows higher PRDM6 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.607, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PRDM6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PRDM6 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, PRDM6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OESOPHAGUS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
