Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ARVCF profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ARVCF expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in READ. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ARVCF is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, ARVCF RNA expression shows 19,719 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight READ, COAD, and UVM as cancer lineages where ARVCF 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 ARVCF — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ARVCF survival associations across molecular data types. ARVCF RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ARVCF RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ARVCF expression shows unfavorable associations in LUSC, but favorable associations in READ, BLCA, UCEC, LUAD and PAAD. The READ Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify READ as the clearest survival context for ARVCF RNA expression.
This table summarizes ARVCF tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ARVCF. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ARVCF shows lower tumor expression in THCA and BRCA and higher tumor expression in COAD, HNSC, UCEC and BLCA. The COAD box plot shows higher ARVCF RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.254, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ARVCF in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ARVCF 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, ARVCF RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_SCLC, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LARGE_INTESTINE and BLOOD_Leukemia.
