Skip to main content

Table 2 Association between E2F2 expression and clinicopathologic characteristics (logistic regression)

From: Increased E2F2 predicts poor prognosis in patients with HCC based on TCGA data

Clinical characteristics

Total(N)

Odds ratio in E2F2 expression

p-Value

Age (>40 vs. ≤40)

370

1.48 (0.73–3.09)

0.28

Gender (male vs. female)

371

0.72 (0.46–1.11)

0.14

BMI(≥25 vs.<25)

335

0.96 (0.63–1.48)

0.87

Family history of cancer (yes vs. no)

320

0.85 (0.53–1.34)

0.48

Histologic grade (G3–4 vs. G1–2)

366

2.62 (1.69–4.10)

1.80E-05

Clinical stage (III-IV vs. I-II)

347

1.74 (1.07–2.85)

0.03

T (T3–4 vs. T1–2)

368

1.64 (1.02–2.65)

0.04

N (N1 vs. N0)

256

1.00 (0.12–8.44)

1.00

M (M1 vs. M0)

270

0.33 (0.02–2.60)

0.34

Residual tumor (R1–2 vs. R0)

342

2.08 (0.79–6.08)

0.15

Tumor status (with tumor vs. tumor free)

352

1.88 (1.20–2.89)

3.79E-03

Vascular invasion (yes vs. no)

315

1.23 (0.77–1.96)

0.38

Child-Pugh (B-C vs. A)

239

1.01 (0.42–2.45)

0.98

AFP

 AFP ≥ 400 vs. AFP<20

217

3.18 (1.74–5.94)

2.16E-04

 20 ≤ AFP < 400 vs. AFP<20

219

2.50 (1.39–4.58)

2.56E-03

 AFP ≥ 400 vs. 20 ≤ AFP < 400

132

1.27 (0.62–2.61)

0.51

New tumor event (yes vs. no)

269

1.48 (0.97–2.26)

0.07

Tumor weight

 W > 1000 vs. W ≤ 500

268

1.26 (0.51–3.23)

0.62

 1000 ≥ W > 500 vs. W ≤ 500

278

1.18 (0.55–2.55)

0.67

 W > 1000 vs.1000 ≥ W > 500

50

1.07 (0.34–3.38)

0.91

Virus

 HBV&HCV vs. HBV

141

1.13 (0.58–2.21)

0.72

 HCV vs. HBV

79

0.62 (0.21–1.68)

0.35

 HBV&HCV vs. HCV

104

1.83 (0.70–5.07)

0.23

History of alcohol consumption (yes vs. no)

358

1.08 (0.69–1.68)

0.73

Postoperative ablation embolization (yes vs. no)

353

1.59 (0.73–3.61)

0.25

Radiation therapy (yes vs. no)

352

1.69 (0.41–8.33)

0.48

  1. T = topography distribution; N = lymph node metastasis; M = distant metastasis; AFP Alpha fetal protein