Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TAF5 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TAF5 expression is associated with patient survival in 24 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRP. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TAF5 is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, TAF5 RNA expression shows 20,331 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight KIRP, HNSC, and ACC as cancer lineages where TAF5 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 TAF5 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TAF5 survival associations across molecular data types. TAF5 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (24), followed by mutation status (6) 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 TAF5 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TAF5 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRP, ACC, UVM and LIHC, but favorable associations in UCS and LUSC. 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 TAF5 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TAF5 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 13, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TAF5. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TAF5 shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, STAD, LIHC and BLCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher TAF5 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.001, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TAF5 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TAF5 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TAF5 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 BLOOD_Leukemia and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
