Comparison 3. EBRT vs. No EBRT: Intermediate‐risk women (as defined by investigators; OR Stage IC OR Grade 3).

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Death from all causes (time‐to‐event data)	5	2560	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.05 [0.85, 1.31]
1.1 EBRT vs no additional treatment	2	974	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.18 [0.83, 1.67]
1.2 EBRT vs no additional treatment (VBT balanced across groups)	2	1220	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.01 [0.74, 1.38]
1.3 EBRT vs VBT	1	366	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.87 [0.47, 1.60]
2 Death from all causes	7	2944	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.98 [0.82, 1.18]
2.1 EBRT vs no additional treatment	3	1097	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.91 [0.53, 1.58]
2.2 EBRT vs no additional treatment (VBT balanced across groups)	3	1481	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.95 [0.74, 1.24]
2.3 EBRT vs VBT	1	366	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.86 [0.48, 1.54]
3 Endometrial cancer‐related deaths (time‐to‐event data)	5	2560	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.03 [0.70, 1.51]
3.1 EBRT vs no additional treatment	2	974	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.40 [0.84, 2.33]
3.2 EBRT vs no additional treatment (VBT balanced across groups)	2	1220	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.84 [0.42, 1.72]
3.3 ERBT vs VBT	1	366	Hazard Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.70 [0.27, 1.84]
4 Endometrial carcinoma‐related deaths	6	2821	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.08 [0.77, 1.51]
4.1 EBRT vs no additional treatment	2	974	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.58 [0.97, 2.57]
4.2 EBRT vs no additional treatment (VBT balanced across groups)	3	1481	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.95 [0.61, 1.47]
4.3 EBRT vs VBT	1	366	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.7 [0.27, 1.80]