Skip to main content

Table 2 Multivariate analysis of LRFS, RRFS, DMFS, PFS and OS for NTR

From: Reflecting on the utility of standardized uptake values on 18F-FDG PET in nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Variables

 

Multivariate analysis

P

HR (95%CI)

Test for LRFS

 Age50

<50 vs. ≥50

0.594

1.223(0.583-2.564)

 T

T1-T2 vs. T3-T4

0.021

2.889(1.170-7.135)

 N

N0-N1 vs. N2-N3

0.726

0.877(0.421-1.828)

 Group

Low NTR vs. High NTR

0.093

1.879(0.899-3.926)

Test for RRFS

 Age50

<50 vs. ≥50

0.680

1.218(0.477-3.112)

 T

T1-T2 vs. T3-T4

0.417

0.682(0.270-1.720)

 N

N0-N1 vs. N2-N3

0.008

5.352(1.542-18.58)

 Group

Low NTR vs. High NTR

0.272

1.689(0.664-4.297)

Test for DMFS

 Age50

<50 vs. ≥50

0.258

1.472(0.753-2.879)

 T

T1-T2 vs. T3-T4

0.036

2.261(1.055-4.848)

 N

N0-N1 vs. N2-N3

<0.001

9.001(3.170-25.55)

 Group

Low NTR vs. High NTR

0.038

2.037(1.039-3.992)

Test for PFS

 Age50

<50 vs. ≥50

0.020

1.748(1.091-2.799)

 T

T1-T2 vs. T3-T4

0.029

1.760(1.059-2.926)

 N

N0-N1 vs. N2-N3

<0.001

2.730(1.648-4.522)

 Group

Low NTR vs. High NTR

0.041

1.636(1.021-2.621)

Test for OS

 Age50

<50 vs. ≥50

0.105

1.826(0.881-3.786)

 T

T1-T2 vs. T3-T4

0.532

1.268(0.602-2.670)

 N

N0-N1 vs. N2-N3

0.014

2.777(1.232-6.260)

 Group

Low NTR vs. High NTR

0.013

2.543(1.214-5.325)

  1. Abbreviations: NTR SUVmax-n/SUVmax-t ratio, Low NTR: NTR-LH < 0.23, NTR-HL < 2.35, and NTR-HH < 1.29; High NTR: NTR-LH ≥ 0.23, NTR-HL ≥ 2.35, and NTR-HH ≥ 1.29, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval