Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TFB2M profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TFB2M expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LUSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TFB2M is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in LUAD. Additionally, TFB2M protein abundance shows 23,820 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight LUSC, LUAD, and LSCC as cancer lineages where TFB2M 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 TFB2M — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TFB2M survival associations across molecular data types. TFB2M RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (2) and mass-spec protein abundance (6). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TFB2M RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TFB2M expression shows unfavorable associations in LGG, KIRP, UVM and STAD, but favorable associations in LUSC and KIRC. The LUSC Kaplan–Meier curve shows clear separation, with the low-expression group declining faster, consistent with the favorable association (log-rank p = .002). Together, the overview and detailed table identify LUSC as the clearest survival context for TFB2M RNA expression.
This table summarizes TFB2M 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 7. The strongest signals are observed in THCA for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TFB2M. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TFB2M shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in LUAD, BLCA, COAD, LUSC and STAD. The LUAD box plot shows higher TFB2M RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.273, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TFB2M in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TFB2M 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, TFB2M 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.
