Table 3.
Weight status of cohorts 1 and 2 combined by loco-regional progression
| Characteristics | Subjects | p valuea | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loco-regional progression | |||
| No (n=122) no (%) or median | Yes (n=18) no (%) or median | ||
| Median pretreatment weight (kg) (range) | 80.55 (42.60–140.50) | 74.50 (46.80–141) | 0.26 |
| Median pretreatment IBW % (range) | 118 (72–193) | 101.5 (73–163) | 0.02 |
| Pretreatment weight status | |||
| <90 % IBW | 14 (11) | 6 (33) | |
| ≥90 % IBW | 108 (89) | 12 (67) | 0.02 |
| Median pretreatment BMI (range) | 26.78 (16.90–45.10) | 24.70 (16.58–41.65) | 0.10 |
| Pretreatment weight status by BMI | |||
| ≤20 BMI | 9 (7.4) | 3 (16.7) | |
| >20 BMI | 113 (92.6) | 15 (83.3) | 0.19 |
| Median weight loss during RT (kg) (range) | 7 (−3.7–26) | 5.5 (−5–18.3) | 0.48 |
| Median weight loss % during RT (range) | 8.67 (−5.78–24.07) | 8.23 (−5.95–22.5) | 0.96 |
kg kilograms, IBW ideal body weight
a
Fisher exact test or Chi square (two-tailed) was used to examine differences for categorical variables and Mann–Whitney U (two-tailed) was used to examine differences for continuous variables