Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TNNC1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TNNC1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TNNC1 is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, TNNC1 RNA expression shows 16,775 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight LUAD, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where TNNC1 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 TNNC1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TNNC1 survival associations across molecular data types. TNNC1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by 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 TNNC1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TNNC1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, LUSC, UVM and HNSC, but favorable associations in LUAD and SKCM. The LUAD Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify LUAD as the clearest survival context for TNNC1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TNNC1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 15, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TNNC1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TNNC1 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KICH, LUSC, LUAD, KIRP and HNSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher TNNC1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.406, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TNNC1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TNNC1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TNNC1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Myeloma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and SOFT_TISSUE.
