Table 3. Summary table of HRs (95% CI) and HR calculation.
| Study | HR (95%CI) | LNR cutoff value | LNR stratification | Statistical analysis | Study design |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | |||||
| Arda | 1.712 (0.982–2.984) | 0.25 | NA | MA | R |
| Wang | 1.641 (1.099–2.450) | 0.3 | Log rank analysis | MA | R |
| Yen | 1.54 (1.05–2.22) | 0.17 | Log rank analysis | MA | R |
| Zhu | 3.655 (1.939–6.888) | 0.43 | Mean | MA | R |
| Liang | 1.42 (1.13–1.76) | 0.125, 0.26, 0.5 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Kritsanasakul | 2.62 (1.79–3.85) | 0.35, 0.69 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| Jung | 1.402 (1.265–4.564) | 0, 0.01, 0.28 | Median value | MA | R |
| Greenberg | 12.2 (2.178–68.622) | 0.13 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| Vaccaro | 2.3 (1.3–4.1) | 0.25 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Wang | 1.754 (1.344–2.289) | 0.11, 0.39 | Log rank analysis | MA | P |
| Tong | 1.958 (1.652–2.321) | 0.35, 0.69 | Log rank analysis | MA | R |
| Shao | 1.263 (1.027–1.552) | 0, 0.17, 0.41, 0.69 | Literature data | MA | R |
| Jung | 1.589 (1.106–2.284) | 0.18 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Wang | 2.30 (2.083–2.545) | 1/14, 0.25, 0.5 | ROC curve analysis | MA | SEER |
| Peng | 3.41 (1.63–7.13) | 0.14, 0.49 | Literature data | MA | R |
| Arslan | 2.197 (1.357–3.556) | 0.05, 0.20 | NA | UA | P |
| Kim | 2.261(1.234–4.143) | 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Kobayashi | 2.114 (1.241–3.600) | 0.04, 0.079, 0.15 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Lykke | 1.560 (1.232–1.975) | 0, 1/12, 1/4, 1/2 | Literature data | MA | P |
| Moug | 2.117 1.350–3.318) | 0.05, 0.19, 0.39 | Literature data | MA | P |
| Thoma | 1.799 (1.132–2.859) | 0, 0.11, 0.21, 0.36, 0.60 | NA | MA | P |
| Parnaby | 2.464 (1.487–4.083) | 0, 0.17, 0.41, 0.69 | Literature data | MA | L |
| Chen | 1.975 (1.519–2.568) | 0.1, 0.24, 0.49, 0.99, 1 | Log rank analysis | MA | SEER |
| Zhou | 1.71 (1.1–2.65) | 0, 0.19 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| DFS | |||||
| Xue | 2.098 (1.050–4.192) | 0.17 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| Arda | 1.736 (0.997–3.024) | 0.25 | NA | MA | R |
| Yen | 1.53 (1.05–2.23) | 0.17 | Log rank analysis | MA | R |
| Tiago | 74.88 (1.55–3617.01) | 0.15 | Literature data | MA | R |
| Zhu | 2.775 (1.544–4.988) | 0.43 | Mean | MA | R |
| Liang | 1.39 (1.15–1.69) | 0.125, 0.26, 0.5 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Jung | 3.073 (1.496–6.313) | 0, 0.01, 0.28 | Median value | MA | R |
| Shimomura | 2.425 (1.497–3.922) | 0.2 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| Hong | 5.868 (1.585–21.729) | 0.1638 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Greenberg | 3.297 (0.875–12.427) | 0.13 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| Vaccaro | 2.6 (1.5–4.8) | 0.25 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Galizia | 5.56 (3.45–12.5) | 0.1818 | ROC curve analysis | MA | R |
| Jing | 11.75(3.20–43.12) | 0.11, 0.20. 429 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Jung | 1.596 (1.122–2.268) | 0.18 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Peng | 3.82 (1.96–7.47) | 0.14, 0.49 | Literature data | MA | R |
| Derwinger | 10.6 (3.2–31.8) | 0.12, 0.27, 0.4 | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Lee | 2.880 (1.950–4.253) | 0.11, 0.24, | Quartiles | MA | R |
| Chin | 3.915 (1.249–12.269) | 0.4, 0.7 | Log rank analysis | MA | R |
| Parnaby | 2.877 (1.837–4.507) | 0, 0.17, 0.41, 0.69 | Literature data | MA | R |
Study design is described as prospective (P) or retrospective (R). SEER surveillance, epidemiology, and end results cancer registry; L location cancer registry.
NA, not available; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease -free survival;
ROC curve: receiver operating characteristic curve. LNR: lymph node ratio,
MA, multivariate statistical analysis models; UA, univariate statistical analysis models.