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