Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TFAM profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TFAM expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TFAM is differentially expressed in 13, with the highest sampling consensus in BLCA. Additionally, TFAM protein abundance shows 30,514 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight KIRC, BLCA, and LSCC as cancer lineages where TFAM 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 TFAM — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TFAM survival associations across molecular data types. TFAM RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (3) and mass-spec protein abundance (10). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TFAM RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TFAM expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC, LIHC, SARC and PAAD, but favorable associations in KIRC and LGG. The KIRC 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 KIRC as the clearest survival context for TFAM RNA expression.
This table summarizes TFAM 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 11. The strongest signals are observed in BLCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TFAM. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TFAM shows lower tumor expression in THCA and KIRC and higher tumor expression in BLCA, HNSC, STAD and LUAD. The BLCA box plot shows higher TFAM RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.038, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TFAM in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TFAM 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, TFAM RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in CNS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LIVER and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
