Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NDUFAF4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NDUFAF4 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in ESCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NDUFAF4 is differentially expressed in 14, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, NDUFAF4 protein abundance shows 24,857 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight ESCA, KIRC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where NDUFAF4 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 NDUFAF4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NDUFAF4 survival associations across molecular data types. NDUFAF4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), 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 NDUFAF4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NDUFAF4 expression shows unfavorable associations in ESCA, LIHC, BRCA, LUAD and HNSC, but favorable associations in READ. The ESCA 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 ESCA as the clearest survival context for NDUFAF4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes NDUFAF4 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 6. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NDUFAF4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NDUFAF4 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, THCA, BRCA, KIRP and LUAD and higher tumor expression in LUSC. The KIRC box plot shows higher NDUFAF4 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.762, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NDUFAF4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NDUFAF4 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, NDUFAF4 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 BLOOD_Lymphoma and LARGE_INTESTINE.
