Q-omics provides the consensus-scored EFCAB6-AS1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. EFCAB6-AS1 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in CESC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, EFCAB6-AS1 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, EFCAB6-AS1 RNA expression shows 11,738 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight CESC, HNSC, and THYM as cancer lineages where EFCAB6-AS1 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 EFCAB6-AS1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes EFCAB6-AS1 survival associations across molecular data types. EFCAB6-AS1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible EFCAB6-AS1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High EFCAB6-AS1 expression shows unfavorable associations in THCA and DLBC, but favorable associations in CESC, UVM, BLCA and UCEC. The CESC 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 CESC as the clearest survival context for EFCAB6-AS1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes EFCAB6-AS1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for EFCAB6-AS1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. EFCAB6-AS1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LIHC, KIRC and PAAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher EFCAB6-AS1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.155, t-test p = .006).
This table shows molecular features associated with EFCAB6-AS1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, EFCAB6-AS1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set.
