Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TFAP2E profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TFAP2E 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, TFAP2E is differentially expressed in 9, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, TFAP2E RNA expression shows 17,703 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Together, these results highlight KIRC, HNSC, and UVM as cancer lineages where TFAP2E 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 TFAP2E — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TFAP2E survival associations across molecular data types. TFAP2E RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (2) 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 TFAP2E RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TFAP2E expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, MESO, ACC, KIRP, LIHC 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 TFAP2E RNA expression.
This table summarizes TFAP2E tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 9, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and COAD for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TFAP2E. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TFAP2E shows lower tumor expression in KICH and higher tumor expression in HNSC, LIHC, THCA, STAD and CHOL. The HNSC box plot shows higher TFAP2E RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.331, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TFAP2E in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TFAP2E shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with UVM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TFAP2E RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in OVARY and BLOOD_Leukemia.
