Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RPE65 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RPE65 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCS. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RPE65 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, RPE65 RNA expression shows 12,052 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight UCS, HNSC, and TGCT as cancer lineages where RPE65 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 RPE65 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RPE65 survival associations across molecular data types. RPE65 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (1). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible RPE65 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RPE65 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, LUAD, ACC, BLCA and SCLC, but favorable associations in UCS. The UCS 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 UCS as the clearest survival context for RPE65 RNA expression.
This table summarizes RPE65 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RPE65. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RPE65 shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, BRCA and UCEC and higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC and LUSC. The HNSC box plot shows higher RPE65 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.535, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RPE65 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RPE65 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, RPE65 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 BLOOD_Myeloma and LARGE_INTESTINE.
