Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TIFAB profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TIFAB expression is associated with patient survival in 25 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TIFAB is differentially expressed in 5, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, TIFAB RNA expression shows 13,840 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Together, these results highlight HNSC, and KIRC as cancer lineages where TIFAB 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 TIFAB — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TIFAB survival associations across molecular data types. TIFAB RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (25), followed by mutation status (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TIFAB RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TIFAB expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, but favorable associations in HNSC, SKCM, CESC, LUAD and OV. The HNSC 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 HNSC as the clearest survival context for TIFAB RNA expression.
This table summarizes TIFAB tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 5, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 1. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and LSCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TIFAB. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TIFAB shows lower tumor expression in COAD and higher tumor expression in KIRC, BRCA, STAD and LIHC. The KIRC box plot shows higher TIFAB RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.477, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TIFAB in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TIFAB shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with HNSC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TIFAB 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_Lymphoma and BLOOD_Leukemia.
