Q-omics provides the consensus-scored XAF1 profile across patient tissues and cancer cell-line models. XAF1 expression is associated with patient survival in 27 of 34 cancer types, with the highest sampling consensus in SKCM. Among the 18 cancer types available for tumor–normal comparison, XAF1 is differentially expressed in 11, with the highest sampling consensus in HNSC. Additionally, XAF1 RNA expression shows 18,561 significant gene co-expression associations, with the highest sampling consensus in THYM. Together, these results highlight SKCM, HNSC, and THYM as cancer lineages where XAF1 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 XAF1 — synthetic lethality, tumor antigen, and pembrolizumab response.
This table summarizes XAF1 survival associations across molecular data types. XAF1 RNA expression shows survival associations in the most cancer types (27), 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 XAF1 RNA expression–survival associations across cancer types. High XAF1 expression shows unfavorable associations in KIRC, LGG, LUSC, UVM and KIRP, but favorable associations in SKCM. The SKCM 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 SKCM as the clearest survival context for XAF1 RNA expression.
This table summarizes XAF1 tumor–normal expression differences by data type. RNA shows broader differences across cancer types, with a lineage consensus of 11, while mass-spec protein shows differences in 7. The strongest signals are observed in KIRC for RNA and CCRCC for protein.
This table ranks reproducible tumor–normal expression differences for XAF1. A negative fold-change indicates higher expression in normal tissue than in tumor tissue. XAF1 shows lower tumor expression in KICH and UCEC and higher tumor expression in HNSC, KIRC, BLCA and STAD. The HNSC box plot shows higher XAF1 RNA expression in tumor versus normal tissue (log2 FC = +2.368, t-test p < 0.001).
This table shows molecular features associated with XAF1 in patient tissues and cancer cell lines. In patient samples, XAF1 shows the broadest associations at the RNA and protein expression levels, with THYM recurring as the lineage with the largest associated feature set. In cancer cell lines, XAF1 RNA and mutation anchors are most strongly linked to RNA-expression features, especially in PANCREAS, while CRISPR and shRNA rows add functional-dependency signals in SOFT_TISSUE and CNS.
