Q-omics provides the consensus-scored SYT5 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. SYT5 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, SYT5 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, SYT5 protein abundance shows 13,471 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, COAD, and GBM as cancer lineages where SYT5 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 SYT5 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes SYT5 survival associations across molecular data types. SYT5 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (5) 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 SYT5 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High SYT5 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, UVM, MESO, ACC and UCS, but favorable associations in CESC. 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 SYT5 RNA expression.
This table summarizes SYT5 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 1. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and PDAC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for SYT5. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. SYT5 shows lower tumor expression in COAD and READ and higher tumor expression in BRCA, HNSC, LUAD and LUSC. The COAD box plot shows higher SYT5 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.527, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with SYT5 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, SYT5 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, SYT5 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
