Skip to main content

Table 4 Step 2. Models of the association linking patients’ SEP to receiving IC

From: Are social inequalities in acute myeloid leukemia survival explained by differences in treatment utilization? Results from a French longitudinal observational study among older patients

  Model 2.0 (M2.0) Model 2.1 Model 2.2 Model 2.3 Model 2.4 Model 2.5
M2.0 + perf. Status M2.0 + AML ontogeny M2.0 + WBC M2.0 + cytogen. Progn. Fully adjusted
OR [95% CI] OR [95% CI] OR [95% CI] OR [95% CI] OR [95% CI]   OR [95% CI]
Age 0.79 [0.76; 0.82] 0.79 [0.76; 0.82] 0.76 [0.73; 0.80] 0.77 [0.74; 0.81] 0.76 [0.73; 0.80] 0.74 [0.70; 0.79]
Sex Men ref   ref   ref   ref     ref  
Women 0.65 [0.40; 1.05] 0.65 [0.40; 1.04] 0.61 [0.36; 1.03] 0.73 [0.44; 1.22] 0.84 [0.50; 1.44] 0.71 [0.40; 1.24]
Patients’ SEP (quintile of deprivation score) Q1 – least ref   ref   Ref   ref     ref  
Q2 0.46 [0.22; 0.99] 0.46 [0.21;0.99] 0.52 [0.23; 1.17] 0.43 [0.20; 0.96] 0.47 [0.20; 1.09] 0.47 [0.20; 1.14]
Q3 0.98 [0.49; 1.95] 0.97 [0.48; 1.95] 1.07 [0.51; 2.25] 0.97 [0.47; 2.01] 0.77 [0.36; 1.65] 1.08 [0.48; 2.41]
Q4 0.55 [0.28; 1.08] 0.56 [0.28; 1.12] 0.58 [0.28; 1.20] 0.54 [0.27; 1.09] 0.45 [0.21; 0.96] 0.58 [0.26; 1.27]
Q5 – most 0.41 [0.19; 0.90] 0.45 [0.20; 0.98] 0.59 [0.25; 1.40] 0.40 [0.17; 0.93] 0.45 [0.19; 1.07] 0.60 [0.23; 1.53]
Charlson comorbidity index 0 ref   ref   ref   ref     ref  
1 0.61 [0.33; 1.13] 0.63 [0.34; 1.17] 0.66 [0.34; 1.29] 0.58 [0.30; 1.10] 0.70 [0.36; 1.37] 0.69 [0.34; 1.40]
2+ 0.64 [0.35; 1.17] 0.66 [0.35; 1.22] 1.05 [0.54; 2.03] 0.55 [0.29; 1.05] 0.59 [0.30; 1.15] 1.06 [0.52; 2.18]
Undefinable 0.14 [0.06; 0.35] 0.18 [0.07; 0.46] 0.19 [0.07; 0.50] 0.13 [0.05; 0.32] 0.31 [0.12; 0.82] 0.18 [0.06; 0.55]
Performance status 0/1    ref         Ref  
2    0.45 [0.23; 0.86]        0.38 [0.18; 0.81]
3/4    0.77 [0.34; 1.74]        0.3 [0.11; 0.82]
Undefinable    0.6 [0.27; 1.36]        0.74 [0.30; 1.83]
AML ontogeny AML de novo      ref       ref  
Secondary (post MDS or post treatment)     0.13 [0.07; 0.23]      0.12 [0.06; 0.22]
Undefinable     Not estimated      Not estimated
White blood cell (WBS) counts (tercile) Tercile 1 – low         Ref     ref  
Tercile 2 – intermediate         1.5 [0.82; 2.75]    1.86 [0.95; 3.65]
Tercile 3 – high        5.74 [3.06; 10.79]    7.83 [3.82; 16.08]
Undefinable a        Not estimated    Not estimated
Cytogenetic prognosis Favorable/Intermediate            ref   ref  
Unfavorable            0.14 [0.08; 0.25] 0.12 [0.06; 0.22]
Undefinable a            Not estimated Not estimated
  1. Models are adjusted for each confounder, and fully adjusted. Generalized linear model with logit link function, adjusted odds ratios [95% Confidence Intervals] (N = 592)
  2. athe perfect predictor of outcome “undefinable” AML ontogeny, White blood cell counts, and cytogenetic prognosis were retained in the models to avoid reducing sample size, but OR and 95%CI were not estimated