Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Cases. Mar 6, 2022; 10(7): 2194-2205
Published online Mar 6, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i7.2194
Figure 1
Figure 1 The flow diagram of this meta-analysis. 1PubMed (n = 22), EMBASE (n = 26), Web of Science (n = 30), CNKI (n = 13).
Figure 2
Figure 2 The association of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio with prognosis of osteosarcoma patients. A: The association of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio with overall survival of osteosarcoma patients; B: The association of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio with disease-free survival of osteosarcoma patients. CI: Confidence interval; HR: Hazard ratio.
Figure 3
Figure 3 The association of platelet to lymphocyte ratio with prognosis of osteosarcoma patients. A: Overall survival; B: Disease-free survival. CI: Confidence interval; HR: Hazard ratio.
Figure 4
Figure 4 The association of lymphocyte to monocyte ratio with prognosis of osteosarcoma patients. A: The association of lymphocyte to monocyte ratio with overall survival of osteosarcoma patients; B: The association of lymphocyte to monocyte ratio with disease-free survival of osteosarcoma patients. CI: Confidence interval; HR: Hazard ratio.
Figure 5
Figure 5 The association of Glasgow prognostic score with prognosis of osteosarcoma patients. A: The association of Glasgow prognostic score with overall survival of osteosarcoma patients; B: The association of Glasgow prognostic score with disease-free survival of osteosarcoma patients. CI: Confidence interval; HR: Hazard ratio.
Figure 6
Figure 6 Sensitivity analysis about the association of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio with overall survival of osteosarcoma patients. CI: Confidence interval.
Figure 7
Figure 7 Begg’s analysis. A: Begg’s funnel plot; B: Trimed Begg’s funnel plot.