TUB bipartite transcription factorGenealiases: RDOB · rd5
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TUB profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TUB expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LGG. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TUB is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in THCA. Additionally, TUB RNA expression shows 23,318 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight LGG, THCA, and GBM as cancer lineages where TUB 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 TUB — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TUB survival associations across molecular data types. TUB RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TUB RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TUB expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, COAD and STAD, but favorable associations in LGG, PAAD and KIRC. The LGG 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 LGG as the clearest survival context for TUB RNA expression.
This table summarizes TUB tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TUB. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TUB shows lower tumor expression in THCA, KIRP, COAD, BLCA, LUAD and KIRC. The THCA box plot shows higher TUB RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.975, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TUB in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TUB shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TUB RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUSC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in PANCREAS and OVARY.
