Table 2. Main characteristics and results of the studies evaluating LVD and LNM.
| Author, Year, Country | No. of patients | Age | Tumor type | Antibody dilution | LVD of LNM- (No.) | LVD of LNM+ (No.) | Area | r (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abe, 2016, Japan [11] | 91 | 54 (30–81)a | invasive ductal BC | D2-40 (1:100) | 5.56 ± 4.48 (38) | 8.44 ± 6.16 (53) | total | 0.25 (0.05, 0.43) |
| Zhang, 2015, China [37] | 106 | 34 (26–35)a (51) 50 (40–67)a (56) |
invasive ductal BC | LYVE-1 (NG) | L (25), H (37) | L (19), H (25) | total | −0.03 (−0.22, 0.16) |
| Widodo, 2013, Indonesia [36] | 48 | 53.0 (34–75)a | breast cancer | D2-40 (1:75) | 7.88 ± 3.05 (18) | 9.09 ± 4.17 (30) | peritumoral | 0.15 (−0.13, 0.41) |
| Ding, 2012, China [16] | 75 | 52.1 (42–63)a | ductal invasive BC and Paget disease | D2-40 (NG) | 9.95 ± 6.46 (43) | 15.36 ± 8.36 (32) | peritumoral | 0.34 (0.12, 0.53) |
| Kandemir, 2012, Turkey [22] | 69 | 54.8 (39–85)a | ductal invasive BC | D2-40 (1:50) | 7.4 ± 1.3 (26) 52.5 ± 11.5 (26) |
14.8 ± 5.1 (43) 75.1 ± 12.3 (43) |
intratumoral peritumoral |
0.66 (0.47, 0.79) 0.67 (0.49, 0.80) |
| Zhao, 2012, China [38] | 73 | 53.8 (29–75)a | ductal invasive BC | D2-40 (1:25) | 5.58 ± 1.92 (34) 7.57 ± 3.10 (34) |
5.38 ± 2.15 (39) 9.82 ± 3.13 (39) |
intratumoral peritumoral |
−0.05 (−0.27, 0.18) 0.34 (0.12, 0.53) |
| Lee, 2010, Korea [25] | 46 | 47.9 ± 2.5c | microinvasive ductal BC | D2-40 (1:130) | 5.14 ± 2.07 (37) | 6.59 ± 1.61 (9) | total | 0.28 (−0.01, 0.52) |
| Britto, 2009, Brazil [14] | 92 | 55 (32–77)b | BC | D2-40 (1:50) | 7 (1–20)b (61) | 8 (0-22)b (31) | total | 0.09 (−0.11, 0.29) |
| El-Gendi, 2009, Egypt [17] | 40 | 51.5 (27–92)b | invasive BC | D2-40 (1:50) | 6.75 (0–15.7)b (14) | 8.85 (0-45)b (24) | total | 0.39 (0.09, 0.63) |
| Mohammed, 2009, UK [27] | 177 | 57 (32–70)b | invasive BC | D2-40 (1:100) | L (104), H (21) L (81), H (44) L (77), H (48) |
L (18), H (34) L (23), H (29) L (13), H (39) |
total intratumoral peritumoral |
0.48 (0.34, 0.60) 0.19 (0.04, 0.33) 0.33 (0.18, 0.47) |
| El-Gohary, 2008, USA [18] | 48 | 64 (27–89)a | invasive BC | D2-40 (1:50) | NG (24) NG (24) |
NG (24) NG (24) |
intratumoral peritumoral |
0.49 (0.24, 0.68) 0.35 (0.07, 0.57) |
| Gu, 2008, China [19] | 61 | 57.59 (29–90)a | BC | podoplanin (1:25) | 4.24 ± 3.01 (29) | 8.31 ± 3.38 (32) | total | 0.54 (0.31, 0.70) |
| Mylona, 2007, Greece [28] | 109 | 56.89 (25–86)a | invasive BC | D2-40 (1:20) | 9.5 (3−23)b (44) | 10 (4-30)b (65) | total | 0.04 (−0.14, 0.22) |
| van der Schaft, 2007, Netherlands [34] | 121 | 61.4 ± 12.2c | ductal invasive BC | podoplanin (NG) | 0.04 ± 1.44 (70) 4.74 ± 3.80 (70) |
0.29 ± 1.06 (51) 4.59 ± 4.29 (51) |
intratumoral peritumoral |
0.10 (−0.08, 0.27) −0.02 (−0.19, 0.16) |
| van Iterson, 2007, Finland [35] | 95 | NG | lobular invasive BC | LYVE-1 (1:300) | 3.2 ± 1.5 (31) | 4.6 ± 1.6 (64) | peritumoral | 0.39 (0.20, 0.55) |
| Guo, 2006, China [20] | 51 | 52.3 (38–67)a | invasive BC | VEGFR-3 (NG) | 19.49 ± 2.80 (10) | 29.24 ± 3.44 (41) | total | 0.76 (0.57, 0.87) |
| Choi, 2005, USA [15] | 29 | 66 (34–91)b | invasive BC | D2-40 (1:5) | NG (15) | NG (14) | total | 0.36 (−0.01, 0.64) |
| Kato, 2005, UK [24] | 67 | 49 (30–86)b | primary BC | LYVE-1 (1:600) | 6.4 ± 4.1 (43) | 6.3 ± 4.5 (20) | total | −0.01 (−0.25, 0.23) |
| Nakamura, 2005, Japan [29] | 113 | 51 (24–87)b | invasive BC | podoplanin (1:200) | 5.74 ± 3.69 (57) | 14.9 ± 7.54 (56) | total | 0.61 (0.46, 0.73) |
| Bono, 2004, UK [12] | 180 | 57 (34–89)b | invasive ductal BC | LYVE-1 (NG) | L (61), H (46) | L (32), H (41) | total | 0.13 (−0.02, 0.27) |
| Schoppmann, 2004, Austria [31] | 374 | 57.6 (median) | invasive BC | podoplanin (1:200) | 8.9 ± 4.2 (212) | 9.8 ± 4.9 (162) | total | 0.10 (0.00, 0.20) |
| Nathanson, 2000, USA [30] | 60 | 53 (28–81)b | stage II BC | VEGFR-3 (NG) | 4 ± 4.16 (27) | 16 ± 8.04 (33) | total | 0.67 (0.48, 0.81) |
a mean (range); b median (range); c mean ± SD; BC, breast cancer; H, high LVD; L, low LVD; NG, not given.