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

Table 5 Step 3. Adjusted models of the association linking patients’ SEP to receiving non-intensive therapy (n = 405)

		Model 3.0 (M3.0)		Model 3.1		Model 3.2		Model 3.3
		Model 3.0 (M3.0)		M3.0 + perf. Status		M3.0 + WBC		Fully adjusted
		OR	[95% CI]	OR	[95% CI]	OR	[95% CI]	OR	[95% CI]
Age		0.94	[0.91; 0.97]	0.96	[0.92; 0.99]	0.95	[0.92; 0.98]	0.96	[0.93; 0.99]
Sex	Men	ref		ref		ref		ref
Sex	Women	1.39	[0.88; 2.20]	1.56	[0.96; 2.52]	1.41	[0.88; 2.25]	1.56	[0.96; 2.55]
Patients’ SEP (quintile of deprivation score)	Q1 – least	ref		ref		ref		ref
	Q2	1.02	[0.50; 2.09]	0.89	[0.42; 1.89]	0.94	[0.45; 1.98]	0.85	[0.40; 1.84]
	Q3	1.09	[0.54; 2.20]	1.05	[0.50; 2.21]	1.07	[0.52; 2.19]	1.06	[0.50; 2.26]
	Q4	1.12	[0.56; 2.25]	1.04	[0.51; 2.13]	1.04	[0.51; 2.12]	1.00	[0.48; 2.08]
	Q5 – most	1.05	[0.51; 2.17]	1.05	[0.50; 2.22]	1.06	[0.50; 2.24]	1.07	[0.50; 2.32]
Charlson comorbidity index	0	ref		ref		ref		ref
	1	0.42	[0.23; 0.75]	0.47	[0.26; 0.86]	0.43	[0.23; 0.77]	0.47	[0.25; 0.86]
	2+	0.43	[0.23; 0.80]	0.51	[0.27; 0.98]	0.42	[0.22; 0.79]	0.49	[0.25; 0.94]
	Undefinable	0.10	[0.06; 0.20]	0.15	[0.07; 0.29]	0.12	[0.06; 0.22]	0.15	[0.08; 0.31]
Performance status	0/1			ref				ref
	2			0.88	[0.46; 1.68]			0.92	[0.48; 1.79]
	3/4			0.21	[0.10; 0.45]			0.24	[0.11; 0.52]
	Undefinable			0.36	[0.20; 0.65]			0.41	[0.22; 0.76]
White blood cell (WBS) counts (tercile)	Tercile 1 – low					ref		ref
	Tercile 2 – intermediate					0.76	[0.44; 1.30]	0.85	[0.49; 1.49]
	Tercile 3 – high					0.41	[0.23; 0.72]	0.51	[0.28; 0.92]
	Undefinable					0.13	[0.03; 0.71]	0.16	[0.03; 0.93]

Population is selected among those who were not considered for intensive chemotherapy. Generalized linear model with logit link function, adjusted odds ratios [95% Confidence Intervals]

ISSN: 1471-2407