UDP glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A4Genealiases: HUG-BR2 · UDPGT 1-4 · UGT-1D · UGT1-04 · UGT1.4 · UGT1A4S
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored UGT1A4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. UGT1A4 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, UGT1A4 is differentially expressed in 8, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, UGT1A4 RNA expression shows 12,001 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRP, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where UGT1A4 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 UGT1A4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes UGT1A4 survival associations across molecular data types. UGT1A4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible UGT1A4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High UGT1A4 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, KICH, CHOL and MESO, but favorable associations in BLCA and HNSC. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for UGT1A4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes UGT1A4 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 8. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for UGT1A4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. UGT1A4 shows lower tumor expression in COAD, CHOL and LIHC and higher tumor expression in KIRC, HNSC and LUSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher UGT1A4 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.047, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with UGT1A4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, UGT1A4 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, UGT1A4 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_SCLC and LARGE_INTESTINE.
