Skip to main content
. 2016 Oct 26;104(6):1583–1593. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.115.119958

TABLE 2.

Kaplan-Meier analysis of outcomes for patients who were or were not taking MHSs and were being treated for prostate cancer with the use of definitive IMRT1

MHS nonusers with events (total n = 1990), n (%) % (95% CI) MHS users with events (total n = 217), n (%) % (95% CI) Log-rank P sHR (95% CI) P
5-y FFBF all 185 (9) 89 (87, 91) 17 (8) 94 (89, 96) 0.12 0.75 (0.45, 1.23 0.25
 Low risk 96 (93, 97) 99 (91, 100) 0.37
 Intermediate risk 87 (83, 90) 88 (76, 94) 0.68
 High risk 78 (72, 84) 88 (66, 96) 0.27
5-y FFDM 64 (3) 96 (95, 97) 5 (2) 97 (93, 99) 0.32 0.75 (0.30, 1.88 0.54
5-y CSS 25 (1) 99 (98, 100) 1 (1) 100 (96, 100) 0.22 0.41 (0.05, 3.16 0.39
5-y OS 171 (9) 92 (91, 94) 10 (5) 97 (93, 99) 0.012 0.61 (0.32, 1.16 0.133
1

Columns on the left side (number of events, their 95% CIs, and the log-rank P values) of the table (Kaplan Meier analysis) were unadjusted. Adjusted ratios are provided on the right side (sHRs and P values) of the table. CSS, cancer-specific survival; FFBF, freedom from biochemical failure; FFDM, freedom from distant metastasis; IMRT, intensity-modulated radiation therapy; MHS, men’s health supplement; OS, overall survival; sHR, subdistribution HR.

2

P < 0.05.