Background: Although numerous investigators have made efforts to assess prognostic biomarkers of prostate cancer, no biomarker has been recommended for clinical practice.Methods: According to REMARK (Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies) and MISFISHIE (Minimum information specification for in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry experiments) guidelines, the published articles of immunohistochemistry-based prognostic biomarkers on prostate cancer were extracted and pooled.Results: Ninety-three prognostic biomarkers from 92 high-quality cohort studies were included in this metaanalysis. Our analysis reveals some promising independent prognostic biomarkers, including Ki-67 [all-cause mortality (ACM) HR, 1.85; 95% confidence interval

<p>XLSX file - 44KB, Supplementary Table S3. Main specimen and methodological characteristics of the 92 included high-quality cohort studies of this systematic review.</p>

<p>PDF file - 394KB, Supplementary Figure 1. Forest plots of the data from the eligible studies in comparison of the outcome with each of the fourteen biomarkers (labeled A through N). The biomarkers were pooled with two or more studies using both fixed effects and random effects model. Of these studies, hazard ratio (HR), 95 percent confidence interval (CI) and relative weight are displayed, respectively. SEs are displayed for log of the HR.</p>

<p>PDF file - 366KB, Supplementary Figure 1. Forest plots of the data from the eligible studies in comparison of the outcome with each of the fourteen biomarkers (labeled A through N). The biomarkers were pooled with two or more studies using both fixed effects and random effects model. Of these studies, hazard ratio (HR), 95 percent confidence interval (CI) and relative weight are displayed, respectively. SEs are displayed for log of the HR.</p>

<p>PDF file - 103KB, Supplementary Table S6. Proteins of the eligible studies related to DFS organized according to Hanahan-Weinberg functional capabilities.</p>