Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Results of quantitative meta-analyses

From: Prognostic effect of factors involved in revised Tokuhashi score system for patients with spinal metastases: a systematic review and Meta-analysis

Prognostic factor No. of studies No. of patients Pooled effect size(HR) CI 95% I2 (%) Effect model Z test
(P value)
Excluded studies by sensitivity analysis Publication bias
(P value)
Begg’s Egger’s
KPS(10-40VS.50–70) [9, 38, 71] 3 479 1.27 (0.89, 1.79) 19.8 Fixed 0.186a 0 1.000 0.188
KPS(10-40VS.80–100) [11, 26, 38, 76] 4 377 3.46 (1.83, 6.57) 0.0 Fixed < 0.001 3 [9, 71, 79] 0.308 0.404
KPS(50-70VS.80–100)
[26, 75, 78, 79]
4 455 2.47 (1.83, 3.32) 0.0 Fixed < 0.001 0 1.000 0.834
KPS(10-70VS.80–100) [30, 31, 32,33,34,35, 46] 6 1307 1.94 (1.68, 2.25) 7.0 Fixed < 0.001 0 0.133 0.214
ECOG(1-2VS.3–4) [19, 37, 40, 43, 64, 66, 75] 7 887 2.22 (1.82, 2.71) 23.0 Fixed < 0.001 4 [29, 32, 60, 72] 0.548 0.345
Extraspinal bone metastases [9, 19, 26, 29, 32, 34, 38, 43, 47, 60, 70] 11 3831 1.37 (1.23, 1.52) 38.5 Fixed < 0.001 0 0.755 0.819
No. of involved vertebrae (≥2VS.1) [26, 34, 37, 41, 52, 60] 6 450 1.22 (0.96, 1.56) 31.9 Fixed 0.102a 0 1.000 0.434
No. of involved vertebrae (≥3VS.1–2) [8, 19, 29, 31, 38, 43, 53, 63, 75] 9 1292 1.34 (1.17, 1.53) 29.7 Fixed < 0.001 0 0.118 0.046b
Visceral metastases [9, 19, 26, 30, 31, 33, 34, 38, 44, 46, 47, 52, 53, 56, 58, 60, 66, 76] 18 1779 1.83 (1.59, 2.09) 43.9 Fixed < 0.001 7 [28, 29, 32, 33, 35, 43, 74, 72] 0.880 0.969
Ambulatory status [8, 19, 26, 28,29,30,31,32, 36, 37, 41, 43, 51, 53, 60, 63, 69, 71, 75] 20 4456 1.80 (1.52, 2.13) 52.8 Random < 0.001 0 0.922 0.953
Frankel (C-D VS. E) [34, 46, 49, 53, 76] 6 631 1.41 (1.10, 1.81) 39.5 Fixed 0.006 0 0.707 0.967
  1. Note: aPooled effect sizes were considered to be non-significant statistically (P value was more than 0.05 by Z test); bA significant publication bias was existed according to Egger’s test and the nonparametric trim and fill method was performed to rectify the bias