Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FSIP2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FSIP2 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in CESC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FSIP2 is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, FSIP2 RNA expression shows 18,757 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight CESC, COAD, and THYM as cancer lineages where FSIP2 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 FSIP2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FSIP2 survival associations across molecular data types. FSIP2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible FSIP2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FSIP2 expression shows unfavorable associations in CESC, LUAD and STAD, but favorable associations in BLCA, SCLC and SKCM. The CESC 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 CESC as the clearest survival context for FSIP2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FSIP2 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 1. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FSIP2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FSIP2 shows lower tumor expression in COAD, READ and KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LUAD and LUSC. The COAD box plot shows higher FSIP2 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.378, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FSIP2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FSIP2 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, FSIP2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OVARY and SOFT_TISSUE.
