Q-omics provides the consensus-scored OLFM4 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. OLFM4 expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, OLFM4 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, OLFM4 protein abundance shows 29,094 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight KIRP, KIRC, and GBM as cancer lineages where OLFM4 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 OLFM4 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes OLFM4 survival associations across molecular data types. OLFM4 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (9). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible OLFM4 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High OLFM4 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, HNSC and TGCT, but favorable associations in STAD, KIRC and LGG. The KIRP 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 KIRP as the clearest survival context for OLFM4 RNA expression.
This table summarizes OLFM4 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 9. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for OLFM4. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. OLFM4 shows lower tumor expression in KIRC, KICH, KIRP and BRCA and higher tumor expression in LUSC and UCEC. The KIRC box plot shows higher OLFM4 RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −3.296, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with OLFM4 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, OLFM4 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, OLFM4 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 LARGE_INTESTINE and SOFT_TISSUE.
