xanthine dehydrogenaseGenealiases: XAN1 · XDH/XO · XO · XOR
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored XDH profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. XDH expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, XDH is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, XDH protein abundance shows 13,958 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight ACC, COAD, and LSCC as cancer lineages where XDH 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 XDH — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes XDH survival associations across molecular data types. XDH RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (10) 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 XDH RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High XDH expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KIRC, MESO, KIRP and UVM, but favorable associations in BLCA. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for XDH RNA expression.
This table summarizes XDH 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 4. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for XDH. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. XDH shows lower tumor expression in COAD, BRCA and LIHC and higher tumor expression in LUAD, LUSC and UCEC. The COAD box plot shows higher XDH RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.558, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with XDH in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, XDH shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, XDH RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and SOFT_TISSUE.
