Q-omics provides the consensus-scored MTHFS profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. MTHFS expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, MTHFS is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, MTHFS RNA expression shows 18,822 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and UVM as cancer lineages where MTHFS 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 MTHFS — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes MTHFS survival associations across molecular data types. MTHFS RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (8). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible MTHFS RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High MTHFS expression shows unfavorable associations in HNSC, COAD, UVM and LGG, but favorable associations in KIRC and LIHC. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for MTHFS RNA expression.
This table summarizes MTHFS tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for MTHFS. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. MTHFS shows lower tumor expression in THCA, KICH, LIHC and KIRP and higher tumor expression in HNSC and BLCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher MTHFS RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.140, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with MTHFS in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, MTHFS 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, MTHFS RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SOFT_TISSUE, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in CNS and BONE.
