Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RING1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RING1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RING1 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, RING1 protein abundance shows 28,187 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight UVM, KICH, and GBM as cancer lineages where RING1 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 RING1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RING1 survival associations across molecular data types. RING1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (1) 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 RING1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RING1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, COAD and PRAD, but favorable associations in UVM, ESCA and READ. The UVM Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .003). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UVM as the clearest survival context for RING1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes RING1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RING1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RING1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, THCA and BRCA and higher tumor expression in LIHC, HNSC and CHOL. The KICH box plot shows higher RING1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.618, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RING1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RING1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, RING1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in CNS and LARGE_INTESTINE.
