Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RDH16 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RDH16 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RDH16 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, RDH16 RNA expression shows 17,944 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight ACC, HNSC, and UVM as cancer lineages where RDH16 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 RDH16 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RDH16 survival associations across molecular data types. RDH16 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (7) 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 RDH16 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RDH16 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KIRC and COAD, but favorable associations in UCS, LIHC and UCEC. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for RDH16 RNA expression.
This table summarizes RDH16 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RDH16. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RDH16 shows lower tumor expression in LIHC and higher tumor expression in HNSC, COAD, BLCA, BRCA and LUSC. The HNSC box plot shows higher RDH16 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.579, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RDH16 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RDH16 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, RDH16 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 LUNG_NSCLC_LUSC and BLOOD_Leukemia.
