Q-omics provides the consensus-scored WDR45 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. WDR45 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, WDR45 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, WDR45 RNA expression shows 17,994 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight COAD, and ACC as cancer lineages where WDR45 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 WDR45 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes WDR45 survival associations across molecular data types. WDR45 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible WDR45 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High WDR45 expression shows unfavorable associations in COAD, KICH and LIHC, but favorable associations in HNSC, MESO and BLCA. The COAD 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 COAD as the clearest survival context for WDR45 RNA expression.
This table summarizes WDR45 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for WDR45. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. WDR45 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and higher tumor expression in COAD, KIRC, LIHC, CHOL and ESCA. The COAD box plot shows higher WDR45 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.500, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with WDR45 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, WDR45 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, WDR45 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_SCLC and CNS.
