Q-omics provides the consensus-scored VIT profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. VIT expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in MESO. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, VIT is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, VIT RNA expression shows 10,688 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight MESO, BLCA, and TGCT as cancer lineages where VIT 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 VIT — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes VIT survival associations across molecular data types. VIT RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (5) 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 VIT RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High VIT expression shows unfavorable associations in MESO, SCLC, LAML and ACC, but favorable associations in ESCA and CHOL. The MESO 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 MESO as the clearest survival context for VIT RNA expression.
This table summarizes VIT tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in BLCA for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for VIT. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. VIT shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, THCA, COAD, HNSC, KIRP and KICH. The BLCA box plot shows higher VIT RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −4.887, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with VIT in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, VIT shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, VIT RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in KIDNEY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OVARY and BLOOD_Leukemia.
