Table 2 Associations of CTC-WBCs with clinicopathological features
Outcomes | Study | Odd ratio | Z and P for hazard ratio | Heterogeneity (I2, P) | Publication bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TNM stage (III-IV vs. Stage I-II) | Li, Qiu, Xu | 1.20 (0.76–1.88) | Z = 0.78, P = 0.44 | 0%, 0.77 | / |
Depth of tumor invasion (T3-T4 vs. T1-T2) | Qiu, Wang, Xu | 1.07 (0.63–1.82) | Z = 0.25, P = 0.80 | 0%, 0.79 | / |
Lymph node metastases (Yes vs. no) | Luo, Qiu, Xu | 1.53(0.89–2.65) | Z = 1.54, P = 0.12 | 57%,0.10 | / |
Tumor size(> 5 vs. ≤ 5) | Chen, Luo | 2.65(1.58–4.44) | Z = 3.69, P < 0.001 | 0%, 0.73 | Begg’s Test = 1.000 Egger’s test = / |
AFP level (≥ 400 vs. < 400) | Chen, Luo | 2.52(1.50–4.22) | Z = 3.51, P < 0.001 | 0%, 0.60 | Begg’s Test = 1.000 Egger’s test = / |
Liver cirrhosis (Yes vs. no) | Chen, Luo | 1.13 (0.68–1.89) | Z = 0.47, P = 0.64 | 14%, 0.28 | / |