Q-omics provides the consensus-scored TOM1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. TOM1 expression is associated with patient survival in 22 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in UCEC. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, TOM1 is differentially expressed in 8, with the highest sampling consensus in LIHC. Additionally, TOM1 protein abundance shows 27,574 significant protein co-abundance associations, with the highest sampling consensus in LSCC. Together, these results highlight UCEC, LIHC, and LSCC as cancer lineages where TOM1 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 TOM1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes TOM1 survival associations across molecular data types. TOM1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (22), followed by mutation status (8) 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 TOM1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High TOM1 expression shows unfavorable associations in ACC and LIHC, but favorable associations in UCEC, KIRP, ESCA and LGG. The UCEC 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 UCEC as the clearest survival context for TOM1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes TOM1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 8, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 6. The strongest signals are observed in LIHC for RNA and HNSC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for TOM1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. TOM1 shows lower tumor expression in HNSC, THCA and LUSC and higher tumor expression in LIHC, KICH and CHOL. The LIHC box plot shows higher TOM1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +0.840, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with TOM1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, TOM1 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, TOM1 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 OVARY and BLOOD_Lymphoma.
