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