electron transfer flavoprotein subunit betaGenealiases: FP585 · MADD
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored ETFB profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. ETFB expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCS. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, ETFB is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Additionally, ETFB protein abundance shows 22,361 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight UCS, BRCA, and PDAC as cancer lineages where ETFB 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 ETFB — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes ETFB survival associations across molecular data types. ETFB RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (1) and mass-spec protein abundance (8). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible ETFB RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High ETFB expression shows unfavorable associations in UCS, LUAD, LAML and UVM, but favorable associations in CESC and KIRC. The UCS Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UCS as the clearest survival context for ETFB RNA expression.
This table summarizes ETFB tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 8. The strongest signals are observed in BRCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for ETFB. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. ETFB shows lower tumor expression in BRCA, KICH, CHOL, KIRP and THCA and higher tumor expression in LUSC. The BRCA box plot shows higher ETFB RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.833, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with ETFB in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, ETFB shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, ETFB RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and SOFT_TISSUE.
