Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FIG4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FIG4 expression is associated with patient survival in 19 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FIG4 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, FIG4 RNA expression shows 19,308 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, KICH, and UVM as cancer lineages where FIG4 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 FIG4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FIG4 survival associations across molecular data types. FIG4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (19), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FIG4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FIG4 expression shows unfavorable associations in LIHC, UVM and OV, but favorable associations in KIRC, PAAD and COAD. 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 FIG4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FIG4 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 5. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FIG4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FIG4 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, LUAD and LUSC and higher tumor expression in LIHC, BRCA and CHOL. The KICH box plot shows higher FIG4 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.960, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FIG4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FIG4 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, FIG4 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 BLOOD_Lymphoma and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
