Q-omics provides the consensus-scored BRAF profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. BRAF expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, BRAF is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, BRAF RNA expression shows 21,611 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and ACC as cancer lineages where BRAF 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 BRAF — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes BRAF survival associations across molecular data types. BRAF RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible BRAF RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High BRAF expression shows unfavorable associations in COAD, but favorable associations in KIRC, SCLC, SKCM, HNSC and UCS. 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 BRAF RNA expression.
This table summarizes BRAF tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for BRAF. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. BRAF shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRP, LIHC, KIRC and CHOL. The HNSC box plot shows higher BRAF RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.433, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with BRAF in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, BRAF 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, BRAF 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 BLOOD_Leukemia and SOFT_TISSUE.
