Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of all patients included in the study (n = 163), comparison of these characteristics according to ELR (cut-off ≥ 0.1) and ENLR (cut-off ≥ 0.5)

From: New pre-treatment eosinophil-related ratios as prognostic biomarkers for survival outcomes in endometrial cancer

Patients’ characteristics

All patients included (n = 163, % of total)

ELR < 0.1 n = 117 (%)

ELR ≥ 0.1 n = 46 (%)

p-value*

ENLR < 0.5 n = 118 (%)

ENLR ≥0.5 n = 45 (%)

p-value*

Age at diagnosis (years):

  <  65 years:

74 (45.4%)

4 (73.0%)

20 (27.0)

.757

53 (71.6%)

21 (28.4%)

.410

  ≥ 65 years:

89 (54.6%)

63 (70.8%)

26 (29.2)

65 (73.0%)

24 (27.0%)

FIGO 2009 stage at diagnosis:

 • IA

4 (26.0%)

34 (7.1%)

9 (0.9%)

.070

33 (76.7%)

10 (23.3%)

.136

 • IB

54 (33.2%)

33 (61.1%)

21(38.9%)

35 64.8%)

19 (35.2%)

 • II

24 (14.0%)

19 (79.2%)

5 (20.8%)

18 (75.0%)

6 (25.0%)

 • IIIA

9 (5.5%)

4 (44.4%)

5 (55.6%)

5 (55.6%)

4 (44.4%)

 • IIIB

0

0

0

0

0

 • IIIC1

15 (9.2%)

13 (86.7%)

2 (13.3%)

14 (93.3%)

1 (6.7%)

 • IIIC2

7 (4.3%)

7(100%)

0

7 (100%)

0

 • IVA

9 (5.5%)

6 (66.7%)

3 (33.3%)

5 (55.6%)

4 (44.4%)

 • IVB

2 (1.2%)

1 (50%)

1 (50%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

Patients in advanced stage (FIGO I-II vs. FIGO III-IV) (n,%):

 No (FIGO I-II)

121(74.2%)

85 (70.2%)

36(29.8%)

.461

85 (70.2%)

36 (29.8%)

.299

 Yes (FIGO III-IV)

42 (25.8%)

32 (76.2%)

10(23.8%)

33 (78.6%)

9 (21.4%)

Tumour grade (n,%):

 1

36 (22.1%)

24 (66.7%)

12(33.3%)

.736

26 (72.2%)

10 (27.8%)

.772

 2

61 (37.4%)

45 (73.8%)

16(26.2%)

46 (75.4%)

15 (24.6%)

 3

66 (40.5%)

48 (72.7%)

18(27.3%)

46 (69.7%)

20 (30.3%)

Patients with tumour grade 3 vs. tumour grade 1–2 (n,%):

 Grade 1–2

97 (59.5%)

66 (68.0%)

31(32.0%)

.865

72 (74.2%)

25 (25.8%)

.593

 Grade 3

66 (40.5%)

46 (69.7%)

20(30.3%)

46 (69.7%)

20 (30.3%)

Tumour histology (n,%):

 Endometrioid

119 (73%)

85 (71.4%)

34(28.6%)

.305

87 (73.1%)

32 (26.9%)

.424

 Serous-papillary

14 (8.6%)

12 (85.7%)

2 (14.3%)

10 (71.4%)

4 (28.6%)

 Clear cell

5 (3.1%)

5 (100%)

0

5 (100%)

0

 Squamous

6 (3.7%)

3 (50.0%)

3 (50.0%)

3 (50.0%)

3 (50.0%)

 Villoglandular

2 (1.2%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

 Sarcoma (not LMS or carcinosarcoma)

2 (1.2%)

2 (100%)

0

2 (100%)

0

 Leiomyosarcoma

3 (1.8%)

1 (33.3%)

2 (66.7%)

1 (33.3%)

2 (66.7%)

 Carcinosarcoma

12 (7.4%)

8 (66.7%)

4 (33.3%)

9 (75.0%)

3 (25.0%)

Lymphadenectomy (n,%):

 No

29 (17.8%)

19 (65.6%)

10(34.5%)

.409

19 (65.5%)

10 (34.5%)

.361

 Yes

134 (82.2%)

98 (73.1%)

36(26.9%)

99 (73.9%)

35 (26.1%)

ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO (ESMO 2015) risk groups (n,%):

 1 - Low

28 (17.2%)

21 (75.0%)

7 (25.0%)

.775

21 (75.0%)

7 (25.0%)

.440

 2 - Intermediate

31 (19.0%)

20 (64.5%)

11(35.5%)

21 (67.7%)

10 (32.3%)

  3- High-Intermediate

13 (8.0%)

9 (69.2%)

4 (30.8%)

8 (61.5%)

5 (38.5%)

 4 - High

75 (46.0%)

57 (76.0%)

18(24.0%)

59 (78.7%)

16 (21.3%)

 5 - Advanced

14 (8.6%)

9 (64.3%)

5 (35.7%)

8 (57.1%)

6 (42.9%)

 6 - Metastatic

2 (1.2%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

1 (50.0%)

Patients in high-risk groups according to ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk classification (n,%):

 Low (risk group 1–3)

72 (44.2%)

47 (65.3%)

25(34.7%)

.496

50 (69.4%)

22 (30.6%)

.484

 High (risk group 4–6)

91 (55.8%)

65 (71.4%)

26(28.6%)

68 (74.7%)

23 (25.3%)

Brachytherapy exclusive (n,%):

 No

110 (67.5%)

75 (68.2%)

35(31.8%)

.142

77 (70.0%)

33 (30.0%)

.325

 Yes

53 (32.5%)

42 (79.2%)

11(20.8%)

41 (77.4%)

12 (22.6%)

Chemotherapy (n,%):

 No

104 (63.8%)

72 (69.2%)

32(30.8%)

.337

71 (68.3%)

33 (31.7%)

.118

 Yes

59 (36.2%)

45 (76.3%)

14(23.7%)

47 (79.7%)

12 (20.3%)

  1. * X2 test or T-student test