Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FOXF1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FOXF1 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FOXF1 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, FOXF1 RNA expression shows 16,301 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight UVM, and BLCA as cancer lineages where FOXF1 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 FOXF1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FOXF1 survival associations across molecular data types. FOXF1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (3) 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 FOXF1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FOXF1 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, ACC and KIRP, but favorable associations in HNSC, KIRC and THCA. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for FOXF1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FOXF1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 14, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FOXF1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FOXF1 shows lower tumor expression in BLCA, LUAD, COAD, LUSC and KIRP and higher tumor expression in KIRC. The BLCA box plot shows higher FOXF1 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.530, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FOXF1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FOXF1 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, FOXF1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in PANCREAS and LARGE_INTESTINE.
