Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TFAP2D profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TFAP2D expression is associated with patient survival in 17 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCS. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TFAP2D is differentially expressed in 6, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, TFAP2D RNA expression shows 6,842 significant pathway-activity associations, with the highest sampling consensus in STAD. Together, these results highlight UCS, LUAD, and STAD as cancer lineages where TFAP2D 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 TFAP2D — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TFAP2D survival associations across molecular data types. TFAP2D RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (17), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (3). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TFAP2D RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TFAP2D expression shows unfavorable associations in UCS, SKCM, KIRC, COAD, SCLC and THCA. The UCS Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the high-expression group declining faster, consistent with the unfavorable association (log-rank p = .009). Together, the overview and detailed table identify UCS as the clearest survival context for TFAP2D RNA expression.
This table summarizes TFAP2D tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 6, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in LUAD for RNA and LUAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TFAP2D. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TFAP2D shows lower tumor expression in BRCA, KICH and THCA and higher tumor expression in LUAD, LUSC and KIRC. The LUAD box plot shows higher TFAP2D RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.980, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TFAP2D in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TFAP2D shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with STAD recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TFAP2D RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in OVARY, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LARGE_INTESTINE and BREAST.
