Q-omics provides the consensus-scored USP36 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. USP36 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, USP36 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, USP36 protein abundance shows 23,736 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRP, COAD, and LSCC as cancer lineages where USP36 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 USP36 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes USP36 survival associations across molecular data types. USP36 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible USP36 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High USP36 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, UCEC, LIHC, BLCA and KIRC, but favorable associations in READ. 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 USP36 RNA expression.
This table summarizes USP36 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 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for USP36. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. USP36 shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in COAD, HNSC, LIHC, CHOL and STAD. The COAD box plot shows higher USP36 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.975, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with USP36 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, USP36 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, USP36 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
