ArticleDiagnostic pathology2025
Low CDX2 expression and its clinicopathological associations in colorectal adenocarcinoma: prognostic insights from a retrospective cross-sectional study in Vietnam.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCDX2, an intestine-specific transcription factor, is essential for colorectal epithelial differentiation and has been widely studied as a biomarker in colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC). However, most previous studies applied a binary evaluation (positive/negative), which may underestimate its clinical significance.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of 356 surgically resected CRC cases at the University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City. CDX2 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry using an immunoreactivity score (IRS) that combined staining ratio and intensity. Associations between CDX2 expression and clinicopathological features were analyzed using chi-square and logistic regression tests.
resultsHigh CDX2 expression was observed in 88.8% of tumors, whereas 11.2% showed low expression. Low CDX2 was significantly associated with poor histological differentiation (OR = 3.79; 95% CI: 1.11-12.93; p = 0.033) and advanced local stage pT4a-pT4b compared with pT1-pT3 (OR = 2.86; 95% CI: 1.47-5.58; p = 0.002). No significant associations were found with patient age or sex. The combined scoring system allowed clearer discrimination between biologically distinct subgroups than the traditional binary method.
conclusionsLow CDX2 expression is linked to aggressive pathological features and advanced tumor stage in CRC, highlighting its clinicopathological associations. Semi-quantitative evaluation of CDX2 using both staining ratio and intensity provides a more informative assessment that may aid risk stratification and guide clinical decision-making in CRC patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.