triokinase and FMN cyclaseGenealiases: DAK · NET45 · TKFCD
Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TKFC profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TKFC expression is associated with patient survival in 26 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TKFC is differentially expressed in 15, with the highest sampling consensus in KICH. Additionally, TKFC RNA expression shows 19,000 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in ACC. Together, these results highlight UVM, KICH, and ACC as cancer lineages where TKFC 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 TKFC — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TKFC survival associations across molecular data types. TKFC RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (26), followed by mutation status (7) and mass-spec protein abundance (4). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TKFC RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TKFC expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, ACC and LUAD, but favorable associations in UCEC, SCLC and KIRC. The UVM 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 UVM as the clearest survival context for TKFC RNA expression.
This table summarizes TKFC tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 15, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 4. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TKFC. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TKFC shows lower tumor expression in KICH, KIRP and KIRC and higher tumor expression in COAD, BLCA and HNSC. The KICH box plot shows higher TKFC RNA expression in normal versus tumor tissue (log2 FC = −1.727, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TKFC in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TKFC shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with ACC recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TKFC RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE and LARGE_INTESTINE.
