The prognostic value of COX-2 in predicting metastasis of patients with colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: COX-2 is overexpressed in colorectal tumour tissue relative to the healthy colonic mucosa, thus we investigated the prognostic significance of COX-2 in determining the metastasis of patients with colorectal cancer. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched using the following terms colorectal cancer, colon cancer, rectal cancer, colorectal carcinoma, Cyclooxygenase-2, and prognosis to identify articles providing information on the prognostic importance of COX-2 in adult patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Review papers, non-research letters, comments, case reports, animal studies, original research with sample sizes of fewer than 20, case reports and series, non-English language articles, and pediatric studies (those under the age of 17) were excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the credibility of the included studies. The full texts were evaluated and this study complied with the terms of the local protocol and the Helsinki Declaration. Results: Eight relevant studies were included in this review involving 937 patients. The meta-analysis revealed that COX-2 expression is associated with lymph node invasion (RR 1.85 [1.21, 2.83], P = 0.005, I2 = 88 %) and liver metastasis (RR 4.90 [1.12, 21.57], P = 0.04, I2 = 42 %), but not with venous dissemination (RR 1.48 [0.72, 3.03], P = 0.28, I2 = 87 %). Conclusion: COX-2 expression is associated with lymph node invasion in colorectal cancer but further studies are required to determine the prognostic significance of COX-2 expression in determining metastasis status for colorectal cancer patients.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".