Q-omics provides the consensus-scored SMUG1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. SMUG1 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, SMUG1 is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, SMUG1 protein abundance shows 25,161 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and LUAD as cancer lineages where SMUG1 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 SMUG1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes SMUG1 survival associations across molecular data types. SMUG1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (1) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible SMUG1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High SMUG1 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, LIHC, KICH, UVM and LUAD, but favorable associations in UCS. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for SMUG1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes SMUG1 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 13. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for SMUG1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. SMUG1 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, LUAD, BLCA, LIHC and KIRP. The HNSC box plot shows higher SMUG1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.857, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with SMUG1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, SMUG1 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, SMUG1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and BREAST.
