Table 4 Meta-analyses on the hazard ratio of the overall survival of the subgroups of HPV+/− and p16+/−.

From: Meta analysis: HPV and p16 pattern determines survival in patients with HNSCC and identifies potential new biologic subtype

 

Number of studies

Total patient number

Number of patients of the control versus the experimental group

Fixed effect model HR (95%-CI), p value

Random effects model HR (95%-CI), p value

Quantifying heterogeneity

References

HPV/p16 versus HPV+/p16+

6

425

206/219

0.15 (0.15–0.15); p < 0.0001

0.19 (0.05–0.69); p = 0.0122

tau2 = 2.68; H = 949.3 (945.0–953.6) I2 = 100%; p < 0.0001

25,30,32,33,37,43

HPV+/p16+ versus HPV-/p16-

5

1768

971/797

4.60 (4.51–4.70); p < 0.0001

3.49 (1.93–6.31); p < 0.0001

tau2 = 0; H = 9.1 (7.6–11.0) I2 = 98.8%; p = 0.6005

24,26,28,34,47

HPV+/p16+ versus HPV/p16+

3

1045

900/145

2.70 (2.59–2.82); p < 0.0001

3.3007 (1.4004; 7.7797); p < 0.0001

tau2 < 0.0001; H = 1.0 (1.0–1.0); I2 = 0%; p = 0.90

24,34,47

HPV/p16 versus HPV/p16+

2

75

55/20

1.20 (0.73–1.99); p = 0.48

1.20 (0.73–1.99); p = 0.48

tau2 = 0; H = 1.0; I2 = 0%; p = 0.89

30,31

HPV+/p16+ versus HPV+/p16-

4

1080

925/80

4.09 (3.59–4.67) p < 0.0001

4.09 (3.59–4.67); p < 0.0001

tau2 = 0; H = 1.0 (1.0–1.0); I2 = 0%; p = 0.97

24,26,34,47

HPV/p16 versus HPV/p16

4

191

106/85

0.619 (0.60–0.64); p < 0.0001

0.76 (0.46–1.26); p = 0.29

tau2 = 0.20; H = 11.3 (9.4–13.6); I2 = 99.2%; p < 0.0001

30,31,33,43

  1. Abbreviations: hazard ratio, HR.