Q-omics provides the consensus-scored STRA6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. STRA6 expression is associated with patient survival in 20 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, STRA6 is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, STRA6 RNA expression shows 13,432 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and TGCT as cancer lineages where STRA6 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 STRA6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes STRA6 survival associations across molecular data types. STRA6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (20), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible STRA6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High STRA6 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, KIRP, MESO and LGG, but favorable associations in ESCA and UCEC. 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 STRA6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes STRA6 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 4. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for STRA6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. STRA6 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC and higher tumor expression in THCA, COAD, LUAD, HNSC and LUSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher STRA6 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.898, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with STRA6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, STRA6 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, STRA6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OESOPHAGUS and LARGE_INTESTINE.
