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