Multivariate and subgroup analyses of a randomized, multinational, phase 3 trial of decitabine vs treatment choice of supportive care or cytarabine in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia and poor- or intermediate-risk cytogenetics

Table 3 Overall survival: multivariate proportional hazard analysis

Variable	Hazard ratio	95% CI	P value
Treatment: decitabine vs TC	0.799	(0.653–0.978)	0.0296
Sex: male vs female	1.125	(0.912–1.388)	0.2703
Age group
70–74 vs <70 years	1.311	(1.004–1.711)	0.0468
≥75 vs <70 years	1.560	(1.198–2.032)	0.0010
Baseline cytogenetic risk: intermediate vs poor	0.699	(0.565–0.865)	0.0010
Type of AML: de novo vs secondary	1.110	(0.893–1.380)	0.3452
Baseline ECOG PS: 0 or 1 vs 2	0.771	(0.607–0.978)	0.0321
Geographic region [8]
Eastern Europe vs North America/Australia	1.118	(0.849–1.473)	0.4263
Western Europe vs North America/Australia	0.727	(0.523–1.010)	0.0572
Asia vs North America/Australia	1.047	(0.728–1.505)	0.8052
Western Europe vs Eastern Europe	0.650	(0.482–0.877)	0.0048
Western Europe vs Asia	0.694	(0.472–1.021)	0.0637
Baseline bone marrow blast: >50% vs ≤50%	1.355	(1.099–1.672)	0.0045
Baseline platelets (10⁹/L)^a	0.775	(0.663–0.907)	0.0015
Baseline WBC (10⁹/L)^b	1.256	(1.045–1.509)	0.0151

AML, acute myeloid leukemia; CI, confidence interval; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; TC, patient's choice of treatment with physician's advice; WBC, white blood cell counts.
^aHazard ratio less than 1 indicates lower risk associated with each additional 100 × 10⁹/L in baseline platelet counts.
^bHazard ratio greater than 1 indicates higher risk associated with each additional 25 × 10⁹/L in baseline WBC counts.

ISSN: 1471-2407