enolase superfamily member 1Genealiases: FUCD · RTS · TYMSAS
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ENOSF1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ENOSF1 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ENOSF1 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, ENOSF1 RNA expression shows 19,592 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight UVM, and KICH as cancer lineages where ENOSF1 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 ENOSF1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ENOSF1 survival associations across molecular data types. ENOSF1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), 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 ENOSF1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ENOSF1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, SKCM, ACC and LGG, but favorable associations in KIRP and BRCA. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for ENOSF1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes ENOSF1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ENOSF1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ENOSF1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, KIRP and THCA and higher tumor expression in BLCA, HNSC and LIHC. The KICH box plot shows higher ENOSF1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.812, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ENOSF1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ENOSF1 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, ENOSF1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
