Skip to main content
. 2016 Sep 22;8(1):1871–1883. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.12202

Table 4. Pooled results for the association between P16INK4a promoter hypermethylation and HSIL risk.

Comparisons Studies (N) Sample size (HSIL/controls) Heterogeneity Model a Effect size
I2(%) PQ-test OR (95% CI) P
Total 15 587/491 18 0.253 F 5.80 (3.80-8.84) < 0.001
Ethnicity
Asian 6 198/112 0 0.869 F 9.70 (3.85-24.42) < 0.001
Caucasian 6 270/200 38 0.374 F 4.61 (2.50-8.52) < 0.001
Other ethnicities 3 119/179 43 0.167 F 5.25 (2.46-11.18) < 0.001
Source of controls
Healthy 9 393/272 22 0.247 F 5.74 (3.51-9.36) < 0.001
Non-healthy b 6 194/219 27 0.236 F 5.99 (2.61-13.74) < 0.001
Quality of studies
High (≥ 12) 7 354/211 0 0.453 F 4.08 (2.16-7.73) < 0.001
Low (< 12) 8 233/280 17 0.298 F 7.80 (4.47-13.62) < 0.001
a

When significant heterogeneity was found (I2≥ 50% or PQ-test ≤ 0.1), the random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird method) was used to pool the results; otherwise, the fixed-effects model (Mantel-Haenszel method) was applied.

b

Non-healthy controls included autologous controls (normal tissues adjacent to HSIL specimens), controls with benign gynecological diseases and mixed controls.

Abbreviations: N, number; HSIL, high-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesion; F, fixed-effects model.