Molecular mechanisms of hepatic metastasis in colorectal cancer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer currently accounts for 11% of all cancers in the United States and is the second leading cause of cancer-related death, with the majority of deaths attributable to hepatic metastases. Many new studies are elucidating the complex molecular factors involved in this event, which could be used to generate clinically applicable screening and therapeutic tools. METHODS: An initial Pubmed and Medline literature search using keywords such as, molecular factor, colorectal cancer, hepatic metastasis/es, and main headings, such as angiogenesis, was reviewed. Since there are many molecular factors involved in this process not all could be included in this review. The list of discussed gene products was limited to the most studied factors, identified by the number of references in the literature search, and additional recently discovered gene products with in-vivo evidence of strong metastasis association. RESULTS: Twenty molecular factors were identified and included in the discussion of this review article. The molecular factors were separated into four groups based on their function, they are: proteolysis, adhesion, angiogenesis, and cell survival. All factors have a promising role as a screening or therapeutic target. CONCLUSION: This review has identified the many recent advances in elucidating the pathways involved in colorectal cancer hepatic metastasis. By better understanding the many complex molecular events involved in metastasis, novel screening and therapeutic tools may be developed with the ultimate goal of preventing metastasis and increasing patient survival.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it