Q-omics provides the consensus-scored SHH profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. SHH expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, SHH is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, SHH RNA expression shows 15,331 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Together, these results highlight UVM, COAD, and LUAD as cancer lineages where SHH 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 SHH — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes SHH survival associations across molecular data types. SHH RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (4) 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 SHH RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High SHH expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, DLBC and MESO, but favorable associations in UCEC, SCLC and OV. The UVM Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p < 0.001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UVM as the clearest survival context for SHH RNA expression.
This table summarizes SHH 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for SHH. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. SHH shows lower tumor expression in KICH, LUSC, LUAD and KIRC and higher tumor expression in COAD and UCEC. The COAD box plot shows higher SHH RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +2.142, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with SHH in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, SHH shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LUAD recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, SHH RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OESOPHAGUS and BLOOD_Leukemia.
