Q-omics provides the consensus-scored AANAT profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. AANAT 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, AANAT is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, AANAT RNA expression shows 12,153 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in TGCT. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and TGCT as cancer lineages where AANAT 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 AANAT — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes AANAT survival associations across molecular data types. AANAT RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible AANAT RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High AANAT expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, OV, LGG, KIRP and LIHC, but favorable associations in UVM. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for AANAT RNA expression.
This table summarizes AANAT 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 1. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for AANAT. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. AANAT shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in KIRC, COAD, KIRP, LIHC and HNSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher AANAT RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.257, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with AANAT in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, AANAT shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with TGCT recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, AANAT RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
