Table 3.
References | Level of evidence and design | Number of patients | Outcome measure | Median FU (years) | Significant association |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bartlett 2011 [18] | 2b, RCT | 4325 | DFS | 5 | Yes |
Dowsett 2008 [22] | 1b, RCT | 1856 | DFS | 5.7 | Yes |
Prat 2013 [29] | 4, cohort | 701 | DRFS | 12.5 | Marginally |
Campbell 2016 [19] | 2b, cohort | 503 | DFS | 5.7 | No |
Chae 2011 [20] | 2c, cohort | 171 | DFS | 4.3 | No |
Chapman 2013 [21] | 1b, RCT | 345 | DFS | 9.7 | No |
Esslimani-Sahla 2004 [23] | 3b, case–control | 50 | Recurrence | 5 | No |
Harigopal 2010 [9] | 2b, RCT | 1715 | DFS | 7.2 | No |
Liu 2010 [33] | 2b, cohort | 4046 | BCSS | 10 | No |
Nordenskjold 2016 [34] | 2b, RCT | 449 | Recurrence | 18 | No |
In case of statistically significant associations, a higher PR load is associated with better clinical outcome. Level of evidence, according to the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine [16]
FU Follow-up, DFS Disease-free survival, DRFS Distant recurrence-free survival, BCSS Breast cancer-specific survival