Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ZMYM6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ZMYM6 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ZMYM6 is differentially expressed in 6, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, ZMYM6 RNA expression shows 21,040 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KICH, HNSC, and ACC as cancer lineages where ZMYM6 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 ZMYM6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ZMYM6 survival associations across molecular data types. ZMYM6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (1). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ZMYM6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ZMYM6 expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH, LGG and LIHC, but favorable associations in LUAD, BRCA and COAD. The KICH Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KICH as the clearest survival context for ZMYM6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ZMYM6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 6, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ZMYM6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ZMYM6 shows lower tumor expression in THCA, KICH and UCEC and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LIHC and CHOL. The HNSC box plot shows higher ZMYM6 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.379, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ZMYM6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ZMYM6 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, ZMYM6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in CNS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in STOMACH and LARGE_INTESTINE.
