neurofilament heavy chainGenealiases: CMT2CC · NFH
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NEFH profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NEFH expression is associated with patient survival in 19 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in BRCA. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, NEFH is differentially expressed in 8, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, NEFH protein abundance shows 35,497 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight BRCA, KICH, and GBM as cancer lineages where NEFH 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 NEFH — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NEFH survival associations across molecular data types. NEFH RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (19), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible NEFH RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NEFH expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, but favorable associations in BRCA, HNSC, CHOL, CESC and SCLC. The BRCA 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 BRCA as the clearest survival context for NEFH RNA expression.
This table summarizes NEFH tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 8, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in KICH for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NEFH. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NEFH shows lower tumor expression in KICH, COAD, KIRC, BLCA and READ and higher tumor expression in BRCA. The KICH box plot shows higher NEFH RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −0.996, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NEFH in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NEFH shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NEFH RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Lymphoma, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in BONE and LARGE_INTESTINE.
