Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MTHFD1L profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MTHFD1L expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MTHFD1L is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, MTHFD1L protein abundance shows 18,939 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Together, these results highlight BLCA, COAD, and BRCA as cancer lineages where MTHFD1L 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 MTHFD1L — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MTHFD1L survival associations across molecular data types. MTHFD1L RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible MTHFD1L RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MTHFD1L expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, LIHC, BRCA, ACC and CESC, but favorable associations in READ. The BLCA 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 BLCA as the clearest survival context for MTHFD1L RNA expression.
This table summarizes MTHFD1L tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for MTHFD1L. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MTHFD1L shows higher tumor expression in COAD, HNSC, BLCA, STAD, KIRP and THCA. The COAD box plot shows higher MTHFD1L RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +3.136, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MTHFD1L in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MTHFD1L shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with BRCA recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, MTHFD1L RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Myeloma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in STOMACH and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
