Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TIMMDC1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TIMMDC1 expression is associated with patient survival in 23 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TIMMDC1 is differentially expressed in 12, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, TIMMDC1 protein abundance shows 21,731 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in PDAC. Together, these results highlight LIHC, HNSC, and PDAC as cancer lineages where TIMMDC1 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 TIMMDC1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TIMMDC1 survival associations across molecular data types. TIMMDC1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (23), followed by mutation status (4) and mass-spec protein abundance (7). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TIMMDC1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TIMMDC1 expression shows unfavorable associations in LIHC, KICH, ACC and STAD, but favorable associations in ESCA and KIRC. The LIHC 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 LIHC as the clearest survival context for TIMMDC1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TIMMDC1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 12, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in HNSC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TIMMDC1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TIMMDC1 shows lower tumor expression in THCA and higher tumor expression in HNSC, BLCA, LIHC, LUSC and BRCA. The HNSC box plot shows higher TIMMDC1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.903, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TIMMDC1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TIMMDC1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with PDAC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TIMMDC1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in LIVER, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT and BLOOD_Leukemia.
