Skip to main content
. 2024 Aug 9;37(11):doae061. doi: 10.1093/dote/doae061

Table 3.

HR with 95% CI from Cox Proportional hazards models in 6837 patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer for the outcome death by any cause

All patients
Multivariate
HR (95% CI) p
MDT
No 1.00 (Ref.)
Yes 0.72 (0.66–0.78) <0.001
Sex
Female 1.00 (Ref.)
Male 1.11 (1.03–1.19) 0.006
Age at diagnosis (years)
<50 1.00 (Ref.)
50–59 1.21 (1.01–1.46) 0.046
60–69 1.30 (1.09–1.55) 0.003
70–79 1.54 (1.29–1.84) <0.001
80–89 1.69 (1.40–2.05) <0.001
90 and above 3.11 (2.34–4.14) <0.001
Marital status
Unmarried 1.00 (Ref.)
Married 0.93 (0.87–0.99) 0.025
Education level
Low (<9 years) 1.00 (Ref.)
Intermediate (10 – 12 years) 0.92 (0.86–0.99) 0.025
High (>12 years) 0.86 (0.78–0.94) 0.001
CCI score
0–1 1.00 (Ref.)
2 0.94 (0.86–1.04) 0.242
3 or above 1.13 (1.06–1.21) <0.001
Histopathology
Adenocarcinoma 1.00 (Ref.)
Squamous 1.24 (1.15–1.33) <0.001
Clinical disease stage
Stage 0 1.00 (Ref.)
Stage I 0.99 (0.64–1.54) 0.968
Stage II 1.55 (1.04–2.32) 0.033
Stage III 2.17 (1.46–3.23) 0.004
Stage IVa 2.47 (1.65–3.72) <0.001
Stage IVb 3.34 (2.24–4.99) <0.001
Year of diagnosis
2005–2009 1.00 (Ref.)
2010–2013 1.09 (1.01–1.18) 0.033
2014–2018 0.99 (0.91–1.08) 0.887
Treatment allocation
Curative treatment 1.00 (Ref.)
Palliation 2.47 (2.25–2.70) <0.001

Clinical T-, N- and M-stage calculated according to the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC TNM classification system

Association with improved outcome

Association with poorer outcome