Table 3.

Results of multivariable analysis in patients treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab/nivolumab.

Test		HR (95% CI) for PFS	P	HR (95% CI) for OS	P
All patients for baseline NER (n = 201)
First line TT	Nivolumab-Ipilimumab vs. Nivolumab	0.55 (0.39; 0.78)	0.0007	0.71 (0.47; 1.07)	0.10
NER	×2 units	1.14 (1.01; 1.28)	0.04	1.21 (1.07; 1.38)	0.003
NLR	×2 units	1.01 (0.82; 1.26)	0.90	1.18 (0.93; 1.51)	0.18
IMDC	Global test		0.01		0.0002
	Good vs. Poor	0.63 (0.36; 1.11)	0.11	0.37 (0.18; 0.77)	0.008
	Intermediate vs. Poor	0.56 (0.39; 0.82)	0.003	0.44 (0.29; 0.66)	<0.0001
All patients for eosinophils (n = 201)
Eosinophils	×2 units	0.92 (0.81; 1.04)	0.18	0.83 (0.72; 0.95)	0.007
NLR	×2 units	1.08 (0.90; 130)	0.42	1.30 (1.06; 1.60)	0.01
IMDC	Global test		0.01		0.0002
	Good vs. Poor	0.61 (0.35; 1.06)	0.08	0.38 (0.18; 0.77)	0.008
	Intermediate vs. Poor	0.56 (0.38; 0.82)	0.003	0.45 (0.30; 0.67)	<0.0001
Nivolumab for baseline NER (n = 125)
NER	×2 units	1.13 (0.98; 1.30)	0.10	1.18 (1.01; 1.37)	0.04
NLR	×2 units	1.09 (0.85; 1.38)	0.51	1.24 (0.95; 1.63)	0.11
IMDC	Global test		0.16		0.007
	Good vs. Poor	0.68 (0.34; 1.37)	0.28	0.45 (0.19; 1.07)	0.07
	Intermediate vs. Poor	0.65 (0.41; 1.01)	0.06	0.47 (0.29; 0.75)	0.002
Ipilimumab/Nivolumab for baseline NER (n = 76)
NER	×2 units	1.18 (0.90; 1.55)	0.22	1.33 (1.02; 1.75)	0.04
NLR	×2 units	0.66 (0.39; 1.10)	0.11	0.88 (0.48; 1.59)	0.67
IMDC	Global test		0.01		0.03
	Good vs. Poor	0.39 (0.14; 1.07)	0.07	0.24 (0.06; 0.95)	0.04
	Intermediate vs. Poor	0.32 (0.15; 0.69)	0.003	0.36 (0.16; 0.81)	0.01

HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; PFS: progression free survival; OS: overall survival; IMDC: International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium; NER: neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio; NLR: neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; TT: Treatment type.

HR reflects the relative change in risk of progression or death for a doubling (×2 units) of the predictor value.