Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NDUFAF3 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NDUFAF3 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NDUFAF3 is differentially expressed in 10, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Additionally, NDUFAF3 protein abundance shows 22,702 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KICH, LIHC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where NDUFAF3 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 NDUFAF3 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NDUFAF3 survival associations across molecular data types. NDUFAF3 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (2) 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 NDUFAF3 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NDUFAF3 expression shows unfavorable associations in KICH, KIRC, STAD and LIHC, but favorable associations in KIRP and UVM. The KICH Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .003). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KICH as the clearest survival context for NDUFAF3 RNA expression.
This table summarizes NDUFAF3 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 10, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NDUFAF3. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NDUFAF3 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, LUSC and KICH and higher tumor expression in LIHC, COAD and ESCA. The LIHC box plot shows higher NDUFAF3 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.038, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NDUFAF3 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NDUFAF3 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with LSCC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NDUFAF3 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BREAST and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
