FCH and mu domain containing endocytic adaptor 2Genealiases: []
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FCHO2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FCHO2 expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FCHO2 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in LUSC. Additionally, FCHO2 protein abundance shows 24,516 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, LUSC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where FCHO2 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 FCHO2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FCHO2 survival associations across molecular data types. FCHO2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FCHO2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FCHO2 expression shows unfavorable associations in PAAD, LUSC and UVM, but favorable associations in KIRC, HNSC and LAML. 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 FCHO2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FCHO2 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 6. The strongest signals are observed in LUSC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FCHO2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FCHO2 shows lower tumor expression in LUSC, HNSC, UCEC, KICH, READ and COAD. The LUSC box plot shows higher FCHO2 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.402, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FCHO2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FCHO2 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, FCHO2 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 BONE.
