Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Mar 15.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Dec 11;94(4):755–765. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.12.003

Table 3.

Cox proportional hazard models for overall survival

Prognostic factor Overall cohort Weighted cohort


P Hazard ratio (CI) P Hazard ratio (CI)
Univariate
  Age (>60 vs ≤60 y) .30 1.20 (0.85–1.69) .06 1.27 (0.99–1.63)
  Gender (female vs male) .80 0.96 (0.69–1.33) .77 0.97 (0.76–1.23)
  Race (white vs other) .38 0.85 (0.59–1.22) .004 0.67 (0.52–0.88)
  KPS (≥80 vs <80) .07 0.66 (0.42–1.04) .12 0.75 (0.51–1.08)
  % Weight loss (<10% vs ≥10%) .48 0.89 (0.64–1.23) .13 0.83 (0.65–1.06)
  Baseline hemoglobin (>12 vs ≤12g/dL) .29 0.82 (0.58–1.18) .53 0.92 (0.71–1.19)
  Tumor location (head vs other) .90 1.02 (0.73–1.42) .54 1.08 (0.85–1.37)
  Induction chemotherapy (gemcitabine vs others) .54 1.17 (0.71–1.92) .53 1.12 (0.78–1.61)
  Concurrent chemotherapy (capecitabine vs others) .18 0.74 (0.47–1.15) .06 0.74 (0.54–1.01)
  Change in CA19-9 after induction chemotherapy (>34% vs ≤ 34%) .45 0.87 (0.62–1.24) .69 1.06 (0.81–1.38)
  BED (>70 vs ≤70 Gy) .03 0.63 (0.41–0.95) .01 0.71 (0.56–0.90)
Multivariate efull model
  Age (>60 vs ≤60 y) .002 1.56 (1.18–2.08)
  Race (white vs other) .002 0.64 (0.48–0.85)
  KPS (≥80 vs <80) .15 0.71 (0.45–1.13) .12 0.74 (0.50–1.08)
  % Weight loss (<10% vs ≥10%) .94 1.01 (0.78–1.30)
  Concurrent chemotherapy (capecitabine vs others) .17 0.72 (0.45–1.15) .01 0.65 (0.47–0.91)
  BED (>70 vs ≤70 Gy) .02 0.59 (0.38–0.91) .02 0.75 (0.59–0.94)
Multivariate ereduced model
  Age (>60 vs ≤60 y) .003 1.52 (1.16–2.00)
  Race (white vs other) .002 0.64 (0.48–0.85)
  Concurrent chemotherapy (capecitabine vs others) .01 0.64 (0.46–0.89)
  BED (>70 vs ≤70 Gy) .03 0.63 (0.41–0.95) .01 0.74 (0.58–0.94)

Abbreviations: BED = biologically effective dose; CI = 95% confidence interval; KPS = Karnofsky performance status.