Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TRAPPC5 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TRAPPC5 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TRAPPC5 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, TRAPPC5 RNA expression shows 15,472 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and COAD as cancer lineages where TRAPPC5 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 TRAPPC5 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TRAPPC5 survival associations across molecular data types. TRAPPC5 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TRAPPC5 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TRAPPC5 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, MESO and KIRP, but favorable associations in UCEC, LGG and HNSC. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for TRAPPC5 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TRAPPC5 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TRAPPC5. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TRAPPC5 shows higher tumor expression in COAD, KIRP, LUSC, BRCA, KIRC and CHOL. The COAD box plot shows higher TRAPPC5 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.771, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TRAPPC5 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TRAPPC5 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TRAPPC5 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and BLOOD_Leukemia.
