Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 12;2021(3):CD013316. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013316.pub2

3. Table of comparisons made.

Study IHC MSP PSQ qMSP Bead array MS‐MLPA PCR‐HRM PCR‐mRNA Other
Almuqate 2018 2
Bady 2012 (E‐GBM) 1 2
Bady 2012 (M‐GBM) 1 1
Barault 2015 1 1
Barbagallo 2014 2 2
Bell 2017 1 1
Brigliadori 2016 2
Chai 2018 (7‐site cohort) 3
Chai 2018 (8‐site cohort) 3
Dahlrot 2018 (NS cohort) 1 1
Dahlrot 2018 (RSD cohort) 1 1
Dunn 2009 6
Felsberg 2009 1 1 1
Havik 2012 1 9 2 1
Hsu 2015 1 1 1 2
Karayan‐Tapon 2010 1 1 6 1 1
Kim 2016 1 1
Kristensen 2016 1 1 3
Lalezari 2013 1 1 1
Lattanzio 2015 2 2
Lechapt‐Zalcman 2012 1 1
McDonald 2013 1 1
Melguizo 2012 1 1
Nguyen 2015 2
Park 2011 1 2
Quillien 2016 12 5
Quillien 2014 (test) 1 1 32 1 1
Quillien 2014 (validation) 3
Thon 2017 1 1
Yamashita 2018 1 5
Yang 2012 1 1
Yoshioka 2018 5

Numbers in cells indicate the number of variants of that technique in the respective study for which we could extract hazard ratios.

IHC: immunohistochemistry; MSP: methylation‐specific polymerase chain reaction; PSQ: pyrosequencing; qMSP: methylation‐specific polymerase chain reaction; MS‐MLPA: methylation‐specific multiplex ligation‐dependent probe amplification; PCR‐HRM: polymerase chain reaction with high‐resolution melting; PCR‐mRNA: polymerase chain reaction‐messenger ribonucleic acid.