Q-omics provides the consensus-scored RPL3L profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. RPL3L expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, RPL3L is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, RPL3L protein abundance shows 15,227 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Together, these results highlight UVM, KICH, and HNSC as cancer lineages where RPL3L 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 RPL3L — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes RPL3L survival associations across molecular data types. RPL3L RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible RPL3L RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High RPL3L expression shows unfavorable associations in UCEC, ACC, THCA, COAD and SKCM, but favorable associations in UVM. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for RPL3L RNA expression.
This table summarizes RPL3L tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in LUAD for RNA and PDAC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for RPL3L. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. RPL3L shows lower tumor expression in KICH and HNSC and higher tumor expression in LUAD, LUSC, LIHC and COAD. The KICH box plot shows higher RPL3L RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.382, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with RPL3L in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, RPL3L shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with HNSC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, RPL3L 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 SKIN and BONE.
