Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 2;11:703995. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.703995

Table 4.

Association of overall survival with tumor volume (n=11).

Study (Author/Year of publication) Study design(P/R)a Sample size Primary (P) or nodal (N) cutoff volume (cm3) HR(high vs. low) 95% CI P value Survival probabilities b P value Quality score
Tian (2015) (72) R 229 38 (P) 5-year OS: 15.2% vs. 48.7% <0.01 4
He (2016) (73) R 358 46.4 (P) 2.46 1.48–4.10 0.001 3-year OS: 75.5% vs. 90.5% <0.001 5
Lu (2016) (74) P 180 20 (P) 5-year OS: 70.6% vs. 95.1% 0.001  4
Qin (2016) (76) P 249 33 (P) 1.01 (per cm3) 1.003–1.018 0.04 5-year OS: 70.5% vs. 86.1% 0.006 3
Luo Y, Gao Y, Yang G (2016) (75) R 110 14.1 (N) 1.875 1.001–3.512 0.050 5-year OS: 53.0% vs. 75.6% 0.028 4
Chen (2017) (77) R 1230 7.2/35.7 (N) 1.72 (7.2–35.7 vs. ≤7.2) / 3.41(>35.7 vs. ≤7.2) 1.09–2.69
1.93–6.04
0.019
<0.001
5-year OS:
≤7.2: 90.2% vs.
7.2–35.7: 88.2% vs.
>35.7: 62.3%
<0.001 6
Liang (2017) (79) R 455 28 (P) 3.231 1.776–5.878 <0.001 4-year OS: 75.4% vs. 95.1% <0.001 4
Liu T, Lv J, Qin Y (2017) (81) P 143 43.5 (P)
15.0 (N)
7.81
3.55
1.79–33.3
1.33–9.43
0.006
0.011
5-year OS: 68% vs. 97%
5-year OS: 74% vs. 91%
<0.001
<0.001
5
Zhang (2017) (78) R 393 23 (P) 2.05 1.11–3.80 0.022 3
Chen (2018) (63) P 385 30 (P) 3-year PFS: 89% vs. 96% 0.008 4
Jeong (2018) (80) R 133 33 (P) 2.93 1.16–7.42 0.013 5-year OS: 67% vs. 87% 0.021 5

aStudy design: prospective (P)/retrospective (R). bSurvival outcomes: OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval