4.5 Review

Prognostic and clinicopathological value of FoxM1 expression in colorectal cancer A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 97, Issue 52, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013899

Keywords

colorectal cancer; FoxM1; meta-analysis; prognosis; systematic review

Funding

  1. Project of Nature Science Foundation of China [81672348]
  2. National Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province of China [BK2016255]
  3. Special Clinical Research Fund from Wu JiePing Medical Foundation [320.6750.17276]
  4. Six Major Talent Peak Project of Jiangsu Province of China [2015-WSW-014]
  5. Six One Project for Advanced Medical Talent of Jiangsu Province of China [LGY2016031]
  6. Jiangsu Provincial Medical Youth Talent of China [QNRC2016735]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The study aims to assess the relationship between FoxM1 expression and clinicopathological parameters and prognosis of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) by summarizing the studies included. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and other sources were searched for relative studies. Odds ratio (OR) and confidence interval (CI) were used to assess association between FoxM1 expression and clinical parameters and prognosis of CRC patients. Results: Eight studies were included in the final analysis, with 1149 CRC patients. The outcome revealed that expression of FoxM1 was associated with lymph node metastasis (OR=0.33, 95%CI=0.19-0.62, P<.001), distant metastasis (OR=0.35, 95%CI=0.24-0.46, P<.001) and tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage (OR=0.45, 95%CI=0.29-0.72, P<.001). Meanwhile, reduced FoxM1 expression indicated higher 5-year survival rate (OR=0.38, 95%CI=0.18-0.78, P=.01). Expression of FoxM1 was also increased obviously in CRC tissues (OR=13.04, 95%CI=4.07-41.71, P<.001). Conclusion: This pooled analysis indicated that FoxM1 expression related to lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, TNM stage and poor prognosis of the CRC patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available