Skip to main content
. 2022 Apr 4;11:617167. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.617167

Table 2.

Basic characteristics and quality evaluation results of the included studies.

Study Year Language Hormonal receptor Median age Total CSM Events
Kim et al. (10) 2007 English No 42 (25-68) 50 20
Loo et al. (11) 2011 English Yes - 188 80
Kim et al. (12) 2012 English No 46 (29-63) 56 42
Hu et al. (13) 2012 Chinese No 48.6 ± 7.2 35 15
Mukhtar et al. (14) 2013 English Yes 48.5 (26.7–68.8) 198 92
Tomida et al. (15) 2014 English No - 27 17
Hu et al. (16) 2014 Chinese No 56 33
Xiao (17) 2014 Chinese No 44.12 (35.55-52.69) 44 24
Zhou (18) 2014 Chinese Yes 54 24
Bansal and Santosh (19) 2016 English Yes 47 (28-70) 82 63
Liao (20) 2016 Chinese No 48 35 28
Ballesio et al. (21) 2017 English Yes No 51 20
Eom et al. (22) 2017 English Yes 45 ± 10.09 64 38
Li et al. (23) 2017 English Yes 46 88 39
Fukada et al. (24) 2018 English Yes 304 178
Goorts et al. (25) 2018 English No 53 (29-72) 57 25
Shin et al. (26) 2018 English No 45.7 (22-75) 391 168
Zhang et al. (27) 2018 English Yes 52 (39.4-64.6) 61 26
Shao et al. (28) 2018 Chinese Yes 45 22 14
Xu et al. (29) 2018 Chinese Yes - 108 72
Ling et al. (30) 2019 English No 55 (47-62) 346 257
Liu et al. (31) 2019 Chinese No 35-72 69 41
Zhang et al. (32) 2019 Chinese No 48 48 39

Hormonal receptor “Yes”: The articles studied breast cancer hormonal receptor.

Hormonal receptor “No”: The articles did not study breast cancer hormonal receptor.