Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TSPAN14 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TSPAN14 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TSPAN14 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Additionally, TSPAN14 protein abundance shows 26,234 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, LIHC, and PDAC as cancer lineages where TSPAN14 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 TSPAN14 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TSPAN14 survival associations across molecular data types. TSPAN14 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (10). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TSPAN14 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TSPAN14 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, COAD, LIHC and PAAD, but favorable associations in KIRC and UVM. The KIRC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p < 0.001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRC as the clearest survival context for TSPAN14 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TSPAN14 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 10. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TSPAN14. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TSPAN14 shows lower tumor expression in LUAD and THCA and higher tumor expression in LIHC, STAD, HNSC and UCEC. The LIHC box plot shows higher TSPAN14 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.204, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TSPAN14 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TSPAN14 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TSPAN14 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SOFT_TISSUE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Myeloma and LARGE_INTESTINE.
