Skip to main content

Table 2 Cox univariate and multivariate regression analysis for MFS in 125 ER+ patients

From: Using second harmonic generation to predict patient outcome in solid tumors

 

Univariate analysis

Multivariate analysisa

Variable

HR

95 % CI

p

HR

95 % CI

p

Age

      

 41–55 vs 40 years

0.59

0.27–1.32

0.203

0.80

0.35–1.84

0.599

 56–70 vs 40 years

0.56

0.25–1.26

0.159

0.41

0.13–1.34

0.140

  > 70 vs 40 years

0.46

0.15–1.36

0.159

0.32

0.08–1.27

0.105

Menopausal status

      

 Post-vs premenopausal

0.98

0.55–1.73

0.938

2.46

0.89–6.84

0.083

Tumor size

      

 2–5 vs ≤2 cm

1.76

0.98–3.14

0.056

0.85

0.43–1.70

0.650

  > 5 vs <2 cm

1.51

0.36–6.38

0.579

0.50

0.10–2.42

0.386

Tumor grade

      

 II vs I

3.15

1.30–7.61

0.011

2.76

1.10–6.92

0.030

 III vs I

4.38

1.68–11.45

0.003

3.38

1.15–9.93

0.027

PgR status

      

 Positive vs negative

0.71

0.38–1.35

0.297

0.61

0.30–1.24

0.170

HER2 status

      

 Positive vs negative

4.06

1.71–9.65

0.002

3.67

1.10–6.92

0.009

Log of F/B ratio

0.23

0.08–0.65

0.005

0.16

0.05–0.55

0.004

  1. aThe multivariate model included 123 patients due to 2 missing values for tumor grade