Q-omics provides the consensus-scored SIRT6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. SIRT6 expression is associated with patient survival in 29 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCEC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, SIRT6 is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, SIRT6 RNA expression shows 18,022 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight UCEC, HNSC, and THYM as cancer lineages where SIRT6 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 SIRT6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes SIRT6 survival associations across molecular data types. SIRT6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (29), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible SIRT6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High SIRT6 expression shows unfavorable associations in UCS, KICH, LIHC and ACC, but favorable associations in UCEC and SCLC. The UCEC 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 UCEC as the clearest survival context for SIRT6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes SIRT6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for SIRT6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. SIRT6 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRP, KIRC, LIHC, STAD and BLCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher SIRT6 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.007, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with SIRT6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, SIRT6 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, SIRT6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SOFT_TISSUE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LIVER and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
