Skip to main content

Table 2 The pooled associations between VDR expression and the prognosis of patients with breast cancer

From: Prognostic role of vitamin D receptor in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Outcome subgroup Study number Case number HR (95%CI)-model P value Heterogeneity
I2 (%) P
OS 6 1681 0.82 (0.64–1.06)-random 0.052 69.2 0.006
 Country
  Germany 4 471 0.80 (0.58–1.10)- random 0.161 763 0.005
  Others 2 1210 0.71 (0.27–1.88)-random 0.488 70.7 0.065
 Pathological type
  Invasive ductal 1 82 0.49 (0.12–1.97) 0.315
  Others 5 1599 0.83 (0.64–1.08)- random 0.168 74.1 0.004
 Molecular type
  Triple negative 1 96 0.37 (0.13–1.08) 0.066
  Multiple 5 1585 0.85 (0.67–1.10)-random 0.229 70.1 0.010
 Staining location
  Nucleus 4 1503 0.87 (0.68–1.12)-random 0.293 76.1 0.006
  Nucleus and cytoplasm 2 178 0.41 (0.18–0.95)-fixed 0.038 0 0.753
 Cut-off value
  IRS > 5 2 1196 0.98 (0.67–1.45)- fixed 0.931 7.3 0.299
  IRS > 25 2 272 0.94 (0.70–1.26)-random 0.664 82.7 0.016
  Others 2 213 0.47 (0.30–0.74)- fixed 0.001 0 0.613
DFS 5 594 1.11 (0.73–1.70)- random 0.625 72.7 0.005
CSS 2 1792 0.78 (0.42–1.46)- random 0.439 73.4 0.052
PFS 1 1114 1.14 (0.87–1.50) 0.346
  1. VDR Vitamin D receptor, OS Overall survival, IRS Immunoreactive score, DFS Disease-free survival, CSS Cancer-specific survival, PFS Progression-free survival, HR Hazard ratio, CI Confidence interval