FA complementation group BGenealiases: FA2 · FAAP90 · FAAP95 · FAB · FACB
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FANCB profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FANCB expression is associated with patient survival in 28 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FANCB is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, FANCB RNA expression shows 25,166 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRP, HNSC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where FANCB 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 FANCB — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FANCB survival associations across molecular data types. FANCB RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (28), followed by mutation status (9) and mass-spec protein abundance (2). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FANCB RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FANCB expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, ACC, MESO, KICH, LIHC and UVM. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for FANCB RNA expression.
This table summarizes FANCB tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FANCB. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FANCB shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, BLCA, COAD, STAD, LUAD and LIHC. The HNSC box plot shows higher FANCB RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.067, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FANCB in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FANCB shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, FANCB RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SOFT_TISSUE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BLOOD_Leukemia and LARGE_INTESTINE.
