small nuclear ribonucleoprotein polypeptide FGenealiases: SMF · Sm-F · snRNP-F
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored SNRPF profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. SNRPF expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, SNRPF is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in COAD. Additionally, SNRPF protein abundance shows 36,894 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, COAD, and LSCC as cancer lineages where SNRPF 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 SNRPF — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes SNRPF survival associations across molecular data types. SNRPF RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (1) 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 SNRPF RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High SNRPF expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, ACC, LIHC, KIRP, LUAD and KICH. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for SNRPF RNA expression.
This table summarizes SNRPF tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 16, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 11. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for SNRPF. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. SNRPF shows higher tumor expression in COAD, KIRC, BLCA, STAD, KIRP and LUSC. The COAD box plot shows higher SNRPF RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.627, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with SNRPF in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, SNRPF 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, SNRPF RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in SKIN, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BONE.
