Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TMPRSS11E profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TMPRSS11E expression is associated with patient survival in 21 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LUSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TMPRSS11E is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, TMPRSS11E RNA expression shows 8,763 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ESCA. Together, these results highlight LUSC, HNSC, and ESCA as cancer lineages where TMPRSS11E 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 TMPRSS11E — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TMPRSS11E survival associations across molecular data types. TMPRSS11E RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (21), followed by mutation status (7) 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 TMPRSS11E RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TMPRSS11E expression shows unfavorable associations in LUAD, THYM, UVM and SKCM, but favorable associations in LUSC and OV. The LUSC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .003). Together, the overview and detailed table identify LUSC as the clearest survival context for TMPRSS11E RNA expression.
This table summarizes TMPRSS11E tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TMPRSS11E. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TMPRSS11E shows lower tumor expression in HNSC and KIRC and higher tumor expression in LUAD, THCA, KICH and LUSC. The HNSC box plot shows higher TMPRSS11E RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.991, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TMPRSS11E in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TMPRSS11E shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ESCA recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TMPRSS11E 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 PANCREAS and LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD.
