Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ROBO4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ROBO4 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, ROBO4 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, ROBO4 RNA expression shows 17,995 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in CCRCC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, LUAD, and CCRCC as cancer lineages where ROBO4 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 ROBO4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ROBO4 survival associations across molecular data types. ROBO4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (5) 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 ROBO4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ROBO4 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, LUSC, LGG and BLCA, but favorable associations in KIRC and LIHC. 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 ROBO4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ROBO4 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in LUAD for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ROBO4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ROBO4 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD, KIRP, KICH, LUSC and BRCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC. The LUAD box plot shows higher ROBO4 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.852, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ROBO4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ROBO4 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with CCRCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, ROBO4 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in KIDNEY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LIVER and BONE.
