Q-omics provides the consensus-scored UBA6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. UBA6 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, UBA6 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, UBA6 RNA expression shows 20,892 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and HNSC as cancer lineages where UBA6 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 UBA6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes UBA6 survival associations across molecular data types. UBA6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (9) 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 UBA6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High UBA6 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, LIHC, LGG, UVM and KICH, but favorable associations in READ. 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 UBA6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes UBA6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 11. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for UBA6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. UBA6 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, KIRP, STAD, LUAD and LIHC. The HNSC box plot shows higher UBA6 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.154, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with UBA6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, UBA6 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, UBA6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE and BLOOD_Leukemia.
