Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MIEF2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MIEF2 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MIEF2 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, MIEF2 RNA expression shows 18,806 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRP, KICH, and UVM as cancer lineages where MIEF2 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 MIEF2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MIEF2 survival associations across molecular data types. MIEF2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (5) 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 MIEF2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MIEF2 expression shows favorable associations in KIRP, LUAD, ESCA, BRCA, KIRC and ACC. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for MIEF2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes MIEF2 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 3. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for MIEF2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MIEF2 shows lower tumor expression in KICH, LUSC, LUAD, COAD and READ and higher tumor expression in LIHC. The KICH box plot shows higher MIEF2 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.420, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MIEF2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MIEF2 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, MIEF2 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 BLOOD_Leukemia.
