Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015 Nov 10;22(4):669–675. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.10.024

Table 3.

Multiple regression analysis on outcomes after MAC AlloHCT (A) and after RIC AlloHCT (B).

DFS Relapse NRM OS
Factor N RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P
FC+
No 65 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Yes 15 1.1 (0.5–2.5) 0.79 1.3 (0.4–4.1) 0.60 0.6 (0.2–1.9) 0.42 1.1 (0.5–2.4) 0.85
Age
<18 30 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
18–35 21 1.5 (0.7–3.5) 0.31 0.3 (0.1–1.6) 0.17 2.4 (0.9–6.9) 0.10 1.5 (0.7–3.5) 0.31
>35 29 2.0 (0.9–4.4) 0.08 1.0 (0.4–2.9) 0.98 2.2 (0.7–6.2) 0.19 2.0 (0.9–4.5) 0.09
Donor Type
Matched Sibling 26 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
UCB 54 1.8 (0.8–3.7) 0.07 0.4 (0.2–1.1) 0.09 4.4 (1.3–14.1) 0.01 2.0 (0.9–4.2) 0.08
DFS Relapse NRM OS
Factor N RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P
FC+
  No 113 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
  Yes 10 2.9 (1.4–5.9) <0.01 3.8 (1.7–8.7) <0.01 0.7 (0.2–2.8) 0.59 3.4 (1.7–7.0) <0.01
HCT-CI
  Low risk 41 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
  Int. risk 34 1.1 (0.6–2.0) 0.79 0.9 (0.4–1.8) 0.76 1.3 (0.4–4.9) 0.71 1.1 (0.6–2.2) 0.73
  High risk 48 1.3 (0.7–2.2) 0.37 0.7 (0.4–1.8) 0.25 3.2 (1.1–8.9) 0.03 1.7 (0.9–3.0) 0.08
CMV Serostatus
  Negative 42 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
  Positive 81 0.9 (0.5–1.4) 0.57 0.4 (0.2–0.8) <0.01 4.2 (1.3–13) 0.02 1.0 (0.6–1.7) 0.90