Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ENAM profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ENAM expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ENAM is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, ENAM RNA expression shows 15,617 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Together, these results highlight KIRC, and KIRP as cancer lineages where ENAM 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 ENAM — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ENAM survival associations across molecular data types. ENAM RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (8) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ENAM RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ENAM expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC, UCS, KICH, OV and KIRP. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for ENAM RNA expression.
This table summarizes ENAM 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 2. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ENAM. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ENAM shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, COAD, STAD, LUSC, BLCA and BRCA. The KIRC box plot shows higher ENAM RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.854, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ENAM in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ENAM shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with KIRP recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, ENAM RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LARGE_INTESTINE and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
