Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RFPL3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RFPL3 expression is associated with patient survival in 20 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RFPL3 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, RFPL3 RNA expression shows 13,830 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight UVM, and HNSC as cancer lineages where RFPL3 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 RFPL3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RFPL3 survival associations across molecular data types. RFPL3 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (20), followed by mutation status (8) 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 RFPL3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RFPL3 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, but favorable associations in ESCA, BLCA, UCS, GBM and LIHC. 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 RFPL3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes RFPL3 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RFPL3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RFPL3 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD, LUSC, KICH and KIRP and higher tumor expression in HNSC and KIRC. The HNSC box plot shows higher RFPL3 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.042, t-test p = .001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RFPL3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RFPL3 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, RFPL3 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and LUNG_SCLC.
