Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ZDHHC6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ZDHHC6 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ZDHHC6 is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, ZDHHC6 RNA expression shows 19,761 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and UVM as cancer lineages where ZDHHC6 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 ZDHHC6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ZDHHC6 survival associations across molecular data types. ZDHHC6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (4) 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 ZDHHC6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ZDHHC6 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, CESC, KICH and UVM, but favorable associations in KIRC and LUAD. 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 ZDHHC6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ZDHHC6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 15, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ZDHHC6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ZDHHC6 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, THCA, KICH and KIRP and higher tumor expression in HNSC and STAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher ZDHHC6 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.668, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ZDHHC6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ZDHHC6 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, ZDHHC6 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 URINARY_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
