Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TUBE1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TUBE1 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in SKCM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TUBE1 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Additionally, TUBE1 RNA expression shows 20,973 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight SKCM, LIHC, and THYM as cancer lineages where TUBE1 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 TUBE1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TUBE1 survival associations across molecular data types. TUBE1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (4) and 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 TUBE1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TUBE1 expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH, ACC, OV and KIRC, but favorable associations in SKCM and READ. The SKCM 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 SKCM as the clearest survival context for TUBE1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TUBE1 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TUBE1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TUBE1 shows lower tumor expression in LIHC, KICH, BRCA, THCA and LUAD and higher tumor expression in COAD. The LIHC box plot shows higher TUBE1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.330, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TUBE1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TUBE1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TUBE1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE and LARGE_INTESTINE.
