Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RLIM profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RLIM expression is associated with patient survival in 28 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RLIM is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, RLIM RNA expression shows 20,815 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, COAD, and THYM as cancer lineages where RLIM 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 RLIM — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RLIM survival associations across molecular data types. RLIM RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (7) 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 RLIM RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RLIM expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, UCEC and SARC, but favorable associations in KIRC, ACC and SCLC. The KIRC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRC as the clearest survival context for RLIM RNA expression.
This table summarizes RLIM 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 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RLIM. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RLIM shows higher tumor expression in COAD, HNSC, LIHC, STAD, READ and BRCA. The COAD box plot shows higher RLIM RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.013, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RLIM in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RLIM 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, RLIM RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Lymphoma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
