Q-omics provides the consensus-scored NOMO2 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. NOMO2 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, NOMO2 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, NOMO2 RNA expression shows 18,920 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and THYM as cancer lineages where NOMO2 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 NOMO2 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes NOMO2 survival associations across molecular data types. NOMO2 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (5) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible NOMO2 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High NOMO2 expression shows unfavorable associations in BLCA, CESC, ESCA, SARC and MESO, but favorable associations in KIRC. The KIRC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .001). Together, the overview and detailed table identify KIRC as the clearest survival context for NOMO2 RNA expression.
This table summarizes NOMO2 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for NOMO2. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. NOMO2 shows higher tumor expression in HNSC, COAD, LUAD, LIHC, BRCA and STAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher NOMO2 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.835, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with NOMO2 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, NOMO2 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, NOMO2 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in BLOOD_Leukemia, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LIVER and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
