Q-omics provides the consensus-scored EFCAB10 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. EFCAB10 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, EFCAB10 is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, EFCAB10 RNA expression shows 18,696 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, BLCA, and UVM as cancer lineages where EFCAB10 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 EFCAB10 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes EFCAB10 survival associations across molecular data types. EFCAB10 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 EFCAB10 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High EFCAB10 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, UVM, LGG, ACC and LIHC, but favorable associations in LUAD. The KIRC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .005). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRC as the clearest survival context for EFCAB10 RNA expression.
This table summarizes EFCAB10 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 15, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in BLCA for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for EFCAB10. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. EFCAB10 shows lower tumor expression in LUSC and higher tumor expression in BLCA, KIRC, LIHC, COAD and KIRP. The BLCA box plot shows higher EFCAB10 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.397, t-test p = .002).
This table shows molecular features associated with EFCAB10 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, EFCAB10 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, EFCAB10 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 LARGE_INTESTINE.
