cilia and flagella associated protein 44Genealiases: SPGF20 · WDR52
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored CFAP44 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. CFAP44 expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, CFAP44 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, CFAP44 RNA expression shows 20,928 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight BLCA, KICH, and THYM as cancer lineages where CFAP44 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 CFAP44 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes CFAP44 survival associations across molecular data types. CFAP44 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible CFAP44 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High CFAP44 expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH, KIRC and LGG, but favorable associations in BLCA, HNSC and READ. The BLCA 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 BLCA as the clearest survival context for CFAP44 RNA expression.
This table summarizes CFAP44 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for CFAP44. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. CFAP44 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, THCA and LUSC and higher tumor expression in LIHC, BLCA and COAD. The KICH box plot shows higher CFAP44 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.072, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with CFAP44 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, CFAP44 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, CFAP44 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 SKIN and BLOOD_Leukemia.
