Q-omics provides the consensus-scored EFNB1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. EFNB1 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, EFNB1 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, EFNB1 RNA expression shows 19,477 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight ACC, and HNSC as cancer lineages where EFNB1 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 EFNB1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes EFNB1 survival associations across molecular data types. EFNB1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible EFNB1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High EFNB1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, KIRP, HNSC and LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC and UCS. 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 EFNB1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes EFNB1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 8. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for EFNB1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. EFNB1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, LUAD and BRCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, THCA and LIHC. The HNSC box plot shows higher EFNB1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +2.177, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with EFNB1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, EFNB1 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, EFNB1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BONE.
