Q-omics provides the consensus-scored PRR5L profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. PRR5L expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, PRR5L is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, PRR5L RNA expression shows 18,903 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight UVM, and HNSC as cancer lineages where PRR5L 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 PRR5L — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes PRR5L survival associations across molecular data types. PRR5L RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (5) 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 PRR5L RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High PRR5L expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRP, MESO and STAD, but favorable associations in UCEC and SKCM. 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 PRR5L RNA expression.
This table summarizes PRR5L 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for PRR5L. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. PRR5L shows lower tumor expression in KICH, COAD and LUAD and higher tumor expression in HNSC, STAD and LIHC. The HNSC box plot shows higher PRR5L RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.571, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with PRR5L in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, PRR5L shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, PRR5L RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in CNS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
