Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TMEM214 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TMEM214 expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UVM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TMEM214 is differentially expressed in 16, with the highest sampling consensus in KIRC. Additionally, TMEM214 protein abundance shows 22,250 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in GBM. Together, these results highlight UVM, KIRC, and GBM as cancer lineages where TMEM214 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 TMEM214 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TMEM214 survival associations across molecular data types. TMEM214 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), followed by mutation status (6) and mass-spec protein abundance (5). The rightmost column indicates the cancer type with the highest sampling consensus for each molecular layer.
This table ranks reproducible TMEM214 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TMEM214 expression shows unfavorable associations in UVM, KIRP, BLCA, ACC, LGG and MESO. 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 TMEM214 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TMEM214 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 KIRC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TMEM214. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TMEM214 shows higher tumor expression in KIRC, HNSC, LUSC, LUAD, LIHC and STAD. The KIRC box plot shows higher TMEM214 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +1.238, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TMEM214 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TMEM214 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with GBM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, TMEM214 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in URINARY_TRACT, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in LUNG_NSCLC_LUAD and UPPER_AERODIGESTIVE_TRACT.
