Q-omics provides the consensus-scored WWP1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. WWP1 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, WWP1 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in THCA. Additionally, WWP1 protein abundance shows 30,770 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, THCA, and GBM as cancer lineages where WWP1 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 WWP1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes WWP1 survival associations across molecular data types. WWP1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (10). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible WWP1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High WWP1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, OV and LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC, SKCM and BRCA. 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 WWP1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes WWP1 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 9. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for WWP1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. WWP1 shows lower tumor expression in THCA and KIRP and higher tumor expression in LIHC, BRCA, STAD and HNSC. The THCA box plot shows higher WWP1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.957, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with WWP1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, WWP1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, WWP1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LARGE_INTESTINE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BLOOD_Leukemia.
