Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TMEM132E profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TMEM132E expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TMEM132E is differentially expressed in 7, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, TMEM132E RNA expression shows 12,876 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight COAD, KICH, and TGCT as cancer lineages where TMEM132E 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 TMEM132E — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TMEM132E survival associations across molecular data types. TMEM132E RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), 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 TMEM132E RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TMEM132E expression shows unfavorable associations in COAD, STAD and OV, but favorable associations in HNSC, THYM and UCS. The COAD 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 COAD as the clearest survival context for TMEM132E RNA expression.
This table summarizes TMEM132E tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 7, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TMEM132E. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TMEM132E shows lower tumor expression in KICH, LIHC and PRAD and higher tumor expression in LUAD, BRCA and THCA. The KICH box plot shows higher TMEM132E RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.062, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TMEM132E in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TMEM132E 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, TMEM132E RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OESOPHAGUS and LARGE_INTESTINE.
