Outcome | Total | Normal CEA group | Elevated CEA group |
---|
Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | P Value | Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | P Value | Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | P Value |
---|
RFS |
 Model1 | 2.02 (1.79–2.28) |  < 0.001 | 2.34 (1.89–2.90) |  < 0.001 | 1.56 (1.34–1.82) |  < 0.001 |
 Model2 | 2.02 (1.79–2.28) |  < 0.001 | 2.41 (1.94–2.99) |  < 0.001 | 1.56 (1.34–1.82) |  < 0.001 |
 Model3 | 1.90 (1.67–2.16) |  < 0.001 | 2.10 (1.66–2.66) |  < 0.001 | 1.54 (1.30–1.81) |  < 0.001 |
 Model4 | 2.08 (1.75–2.47) |  < 0.001 | 2.01 (1.47–2.74) | 0.001 | 1.68 (1.35–2.08) |  < 0.001 |
OS |
 Model1 | 2.28 (1.96–2.65) |  < 0.001 | 2.85 (2.18–3.72) |  < 0.001 | 1.64 (1.36–1.98) |  < 0.001 |
 Model2 | 2.26 (1.95–2.63) |  < 0.001 | 3.02 (2.31–3.95) |  < 0.001 | 1.63 (1.35–1.97) |  < 0.001 |
 Model3 | 2.05 (1.74–2.42) |  < 0.001 | 2.54 (1.89–3.42) |  < 0.001 | 1.55 (1.27–1.90) |  < 0.001 |
 Model4 | 2.25 (1.80–2.81) |  < 0.001 | 2.20 (1.44–3.35) |  < 0.001 | 1.72 (1.30–2.28) |  < 0.001 |
- Note: CA 19–9 carbohydrate antigen 19–9, CEA carcinoembryonic antigen, OS overall survival, RFS recurrence-free survival
- Model 1 was unadjusted. Model 2 was adjusted for sex (female vs. male), age. Model 3 was adjusted for sex (female vs. male), age, primary site (rectum vs. colon), surgical approach (open resection vs. laparoscopic resection), pathology stage (III → II), lymph node yield (≥ 12 vs. < 12), tumor differentiation (poor-undifferentiated vs. moderate vs. well), mucinous (colloid) type (yes vs. no), lymphovascular invasion / perineural invasion (yes vs. no), adjuvant chemotherapy (yes vs. no). Model 4 was adjusted for sex (female vs. male), age, primary site (rectum vs. colon), surgical approach (open resection vs. laparoscopic resection), pathology stage (III → II), lymph node yield (≥ 12 vs. < 12), tumor differentiation (poor-undifferentiated vs. moderate vs. well), mucinous (colloid) type (yes vs. no), lymphovascular invasion / perineural invasion (yes vs. no), adjuvant chemotherapy (yes vs. no), microsatellite instability (yes vs. no)