Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Dec 16.
Published in final edited form as: JAMA. 2012 Apr 18;307(15):10.1001/jama.2012.475. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.475

Table 2.

Estimated treatment effect of partial versus radical nephrectomy

Partial nephrectomy
No. of deaths / No. of patients		 Radical nephrectomy
No. of deaths / No. of patients		 Hazard ratio for
overall survival		 95% confidence
interval
Primary analysis
 All patients 487 / 1925 2164 / 5213 0.54 0.34 – 0.85
Subgroup analyses
 Patients < 75 years of age 259 / 1203 962 / 2801 0.47 0.24 – 0.92
 Patients ≥ 75 years of age 228 / 722 1202 / 2412 0.63 0.34 – 1.17
 Charlson score = 0 215 / 1108 1042 / 3017 0.75 0.38 – 1.45
 Charlson score 1 or more 272 / 817 1122 / 2196 0.40 0.21 – 0.75
Sensitivity analyses
 Renal Cell Carcinoma onlyb 457 / 1829 2059 / 4987 0.53 0.33 – 0.84
 Urban residence 412 / 1624 1801 /4303 0.56 0.33 – 0.92
 Rural residence 75 / 301 363 / 910 0.45 0.16 – 1.30
 Treatment years 1992 – 1999 126 / 201 938 / 1288 0.58 0.28 – 1.27
 Treatment years 2000 – 2007 361 / 1724 1226 / 3925 0.48 0.27 – 0.86
a

Hazard ratios are derived from our two-stage residual inclusion model using a Weibull distribution.

b

Renal Cell Carcinoma only includes clear cell, papillary, and chromophobe based on histology provided within SEER. Patients with oncocytoma or other histology were excluded.