Q-omics provides the consensus-scored REL profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. REL expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, REL is differentially expressed in 7, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, REL RNA expression shows 20,373 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and THYM as cancer lineages where REL 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 REL — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes REL survival associations across molecular data types. REL RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (8). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible REL RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High REL expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC, SCLC, LUAD, READ and HNSC. 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 REL RNA expression.
This table summarizes REL tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 7, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for REL. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. REL shows lower tumor expression in KICH and THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, BLCA, BRCA and STAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher REL RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.811, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with REL in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, REL shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, REL RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LARGE_INTESTINE and BLOOD_Leukemia.
