Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis

From: Prognostic and clinicopathological significance of MLKL expression in cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Author Year Region Type of Cancer Sample size (high/low) Follow-up
(month)
Endpoints Expression associated with poor prognosis Assay method Cut-off value Survival analysis NOS score Method
Zhu et al. 2017 China Breast Cancer 27/47(74) 94 OS Low IHC High: the sum of the staining intensity and extent scores was higher than 3 NA 6 2
Zhai et al. 2016 China Gastric Caner 50/67(117) 114 OS Low IHC High: IHC score was no less than 2 Univariate
Multivariate
7 2
Ruan et al. 2015 China Cervical Squamous Cell Carcinoma 25/29(54) 80 OS Low IHC High: the sum of the staining intensity and extent scores was no less than 4 NA 6 2
He et al. 2013 China Ovarian Cancer 75/78(153) 102 OS,DFS Low IHC High: the sum of the staining intensity and extent scores was no less than 4 Univariate
Multivariate
7 1
Li et al. 2016 China Colon Cancer 83/52(135) 95.3 OS,RFS Low IHC High: the sum of the staining intensity and extent scores was no less than 4 Univariate
Multivariate
7 1
Colbert et al. 2013 USA Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma 74/6(80) 114 OS,RFS Low IHC High: the sum of the staining intensity and extent scores was higher than 1 Univariate
Multivariate
7 1
  1. IHC immunohistochemistry, NA not available, NOS Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Method: 1 denoted as obtaining HRs directly from publications; 2 denoted as HRs calculated from the total number of events, corresponding p value and data from Kaplan-Meier curves