Q-omics provides the consensus-scored FZD6 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. FZD6 expression is associated with patient survival in 20 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in PAAD. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, FZD6 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, FZD6 RNA expression shows 20,137 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight PAAD, HNSC, and THYM as cancer lineages where FZD6 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 FZD6 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes FZD6 survival associations across molecular data types. FZD6 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (20), followed by mutation status (3) 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 FZD6 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High FZD6 expression shows unfavorable associations in PAAD, LGG, HNSC, MESO and SARC, but favorable associations in UVM. The PAAD 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 PAAD as the clearest survival context for FZD6 RNA expression.
This table summarizes FZD6 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for FZD6. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. FZD6 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC and LUAD and higher tumor expression in HNSC, COAD, LIHC and BLCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher FZD6 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.754, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with FZD6 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, FZD6 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, FZD6 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SKIN and LARGE_INTESTINE.
