Q-omics provides the consensus-scored SRRM4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. SRRM4 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in PAAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, SRRM4 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in LUSC. Additionally, SRRM4 RNA expression shows 12,575 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in SCLC. Together, these results highlight PAAD, LUSC, and SCLC as cancer lineages where SRRM4 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 SRRM4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes SRRM4 survival associations across molecular data types. SRRM4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (7) 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 SRRM4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High SRRM4 expression shows unfavorable associations in LIHC and UVM, but favorable associations in PAAD, SCLC, LGG and ESCA. The PAAD 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 PAAD as the clearest survival context for SRRM4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes SRRM4 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in LUSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for SRRM4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. SRRM4 shows lower tumor expression in LUSC, LUAD, KICH, STAD and COAD and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The LUSC box plot shows higher SRRM4 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.202, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with SRRM4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, SRRM4 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with SCLC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, SRRM4 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OESOPHAGUS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and BONE.
