Ras and Rab interactor 2Genealiases: MACS · RASSF4
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RIN2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RIN2 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RIN2 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, RIN2 RNA expression shows 19,556 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and UVM as cancer lineages where RIN2 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 RIN2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RIN2 survival associations across molecular data types. RIN2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (10) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible RIN2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RIN2 expression shows unfavorable associations in OV and BLCA, but favorable associations in KIRC, LUAD, LGG and PAAD. 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 RIN2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes RIN2 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 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RIN2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RIN2 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD and higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, READ, CHOL and BRCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher RIN2 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.743, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RIN2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RIN2 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, RIN2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_SCLC and BONE.
