WASP family member 3Genealiases: Brush-1 · SCAR3 · WAVE3
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored WASF3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. WASF3 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LGG. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, WASF3 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in THCA. Additionally, WASF3 RNA expression shows 18,762 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight LGG, THCA, and UVM as cancer lineages where WASF3 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 WASF3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes WASF3 survival associations across molecular data types. WASF3 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), 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 WASF3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High WASF3 expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH and LUSC, but favorable associations in LGG, PAAD, UCS and HNSC. The LGG 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 LGG as the clearest survival context for WASF3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes WASF3 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for WASF3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. WASF3 shows lower tumor expression in THCA, KIRC, LUAD, LUSC and BRCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC. The THCA box plot shows higher WASF3 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.784, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with WASF3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, WASF3 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, WASF3 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in URINARY_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
