Q-omics provides the consensus-scored UBD profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. UBD expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in SKCM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, UBD is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, UBD RNA expression shows 15,693 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight SKCM, KIRC, and UVM as cancer lineages where UBD 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 UBD — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes UBD survival associations across molecular data types. UBD RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible UBD RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High UBD expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM and KIRP, but favorable associations in SKCM, OV, KIRC and HNSC. The SKCM 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 SKCM as the clearest survival context for UBD RNA expression.
This table summarizes UBD 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and PDAC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for UBD. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. UBD shows higher tumor expression in KIRC, COAD, LIHC, STAD, ESCA and LUAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher UBD RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +3.017, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with UBD in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, UBD shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, UBD RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_SCLC and LARGE_INTESTINE.
