Q-omics provides the consensus-scored DFFB profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. DFFB expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, DFFB is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, DFFB RNA expression shows 20,437 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and COAD as cancer lineages where DFFB 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 DFFB — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes DFFB survival associations across molecular data types. DFFB RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (4) 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 DFFB RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High DFFB expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, CESC, KICH, LGG and LIHC, but favorable associations in BLCA. The ACC 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 ACC as the clearest survival context for DFFB RNA expression.
This table summarizes DFFB 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 5. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for DFFB. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. DFFB shows lower tumor expression in KICH and THCA and higher tumor expression in COAD, STAD, BLCA and HNSC. The COAD box plot shows higher DFFB RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.056, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with DFFB in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, DFFB 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, DFFB RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OESOPHAGUS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Lymphoma and BONE.
