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