family with sequence similarity 156 member AGenealiases: PRO0659 · TMEM29
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FAM156A profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FAM156A expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FAM156A is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Additionally, FAM156A RNA expression shows 19,293 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, KIRP, and THYM as cancer lineages where FAM156A 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 FAM156A — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FAM156A survival associations across molecular data types. FAM156A RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FAM156A RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FAM156A expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, COAD, LIHC and LUSC, but favorable associations in LGG and PAAD. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for FAM156A RNA expression.
This table summarizes FAM156A 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 KIRP for RNA.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FAM156A. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FAM156A shows lower tumor expression in KICH and higher tumor expression in KIRP, COAD, HNSC, LIHC and KIRC. The KIRP box plot shows higher FAM156A RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.099, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FAM156A in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FAM156A shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, FAM156A RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BONE.
