Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NAAA profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NAAA expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NAAA is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, NAAA RNA expression shows 18,499 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight UVM, and COAD as cancer lineages where NAAA 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 NAAA — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NAAA survival associations across molecular data types. NAAA RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible NAAA RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NAAA expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, LGG, BRCA and OV, but favorable associations in UCEC and KIRC. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for NAAA RNA expression.
This table summarizes NAAA tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 5. The strongest signals are observed in COAD for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NAAA. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NAAA shows lower tumor expression in COAD, KICH, HNSC, THCA, KIRP and LIHC. The COAD box plot shows higher NAAA RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.952, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NAAA in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NAAA 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, NAAA RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BREAST, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OESOPHAGUS and BLOOD_Leukemia.
