Q-omics provides the consensus-scored USP28 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. USP28 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, USP28 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, USP28 RNA expression shows 20,640 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and LUAD as cancer lineages where USP28 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 USP28 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes USP28 survival associations across molecular data types. USP28 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible USP28 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High USP28 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, LGG and MESO, but favorable associations in KIRC, READ and UCS. 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 USP28 RNA expression.
This table summarizes USP28 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for USP28. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. USP28 shows higher tumor expression in LUAD, LIHC, HNSC, LUSC, CHOL and STAD. The LUAD box plot shows higher USP28 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.669, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with USP28 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, USP28 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, USP28 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BONE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
