Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FMO4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FMO4 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FMO4 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, FMO4 RNA expression shows 18,812 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, KICH, and THYM as cancer lineages where FMO4 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 FMO4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FMO4 survival associations across molecular data types. FMO4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (2) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FMO4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FMO4 expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC, UVM, ACC, LIHC and MESO. 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 FMO4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FMO4 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 3. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FMO4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FMO4 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, COAD, THCA, KIRC, KIRP and LUAD. The KICH box plot shows higher FMO4 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.290, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FMO4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FMO4 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, FMO4 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
