WASP like actin nucleation promoting factorGenealiases: N-WASP · NWASP · WASPB
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored WASL profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. WASL expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, WASL is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, WASL protein abundance shows 22,697 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, COAD, and PDAC as cancer lineages where WASL 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 WASL — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes WASL survival associations across molecular data types. WASL RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible WASL RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High WASL expression shows unfavorable associations in CESC, PAAD, MESO and UVM, but favorable associations in KIRC and UCS. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for WASL RNA expression.
This table summarizes WASL tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for WASL. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. WASL shows lower tumor expression in COAD and READ and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LUAD, LIHC and BRCA. The COAD box plot shows higher WASL RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.089, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with WASL in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, WASL shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, WASL RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Lymphoma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in PANCREAS and BLOOD_Leukemia.
