FOS like 2, AP-1 transcription factor subunitGenealiases: ACED · FRA2
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FOSL2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FOSL2 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FOSL2 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, FOSL2 protein abundance shows 33,265 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight LUAD, KICH, and PDAC as cancer lineages where FOSL2 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 FOSL2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FOSL2 survival associations across molecular data types. FOSL2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (9). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FOSL2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FOSL2 expression shows unfavorable associations in LUAD, LGG, OV, PAAD and SKCM, but favorable associations in SCLC. The LUAD 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 LUAD as the clearest survival context for FOSL2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FOSL2 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 10. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FOSL2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FOSL2 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, COAD, UCEC and BLCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC and LIHC. The KICH box plot shows higher FOSL2 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −2.012, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FOSL2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FOSL2 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, FOSL2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in URINARY_TRACT and BONE.
