Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 29;17:102. doi: 10.1186/s12967-019-1851-1

Table 3.

Univariate and multivariate analysis of PCDH17 expression for overall survival in the Chinese cohort

Variables Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
Hazard Ratio (95% CI) P Hazard Ratio (95% CI) P
Full cohort (n = 97) (n = 97)
PCDH17 a 1.65 (1–2.72) 0.05 2.01 (1.19–2.98) 0.01
Ageb 3.07 (1.87–5.04) < 0.0001 2.10 (1.18–3.61) 0.02
WBC countc 3.14 (1.92–5.14) < 0.0001 2.06 (1.16–3.64) 0.01
Cytogenetic riskd 2.04 (1.49–2.78) < 0.0001 1.60 (1.05–2.43) 0.03
FLT3-ITDe 0.80 (0.36–1.77) 0.58
NPM1 f 0.97 (0.39–2.43) 0.95
CEBPA f 1.18 (0.53–2.62) 0.69
DNMT3A f 1.66 (0.71–3.89) 0.24
IDH2 f 6.13 (0.8–47) 0.08 5.35 (0.63–45.16) 0.12
NRAS f 1.18 (0.37–3.81) 0.78
KRAS f 8.80 (2.53–30.55) < 0.001 5.16 (1.13–23.59) 0.03
U2AF1 f 14.43 (1.81–115.4) 0.01 4.99 (0.37–67.94) 0.23
SRSF2 f 3.28 (0.78–13.85) 0.11 0.95 (0.12–7.46) 0.96
SETBP1 f 0.82 (0.11–5.96) 0.85
KIT f 0.64 (0.16–2.64) 0.54
CN-AML (n = 36) (n = 36)
PCDH17 a 2.58 (1.02–6.52) 0.04 2.95 (1.04–8.32) 0.04
Ageb 1.39 (0.61–3.14) 0.43
WBC countc 3.05 (1.34–6.93) 0.008 3.26 (1.35–7.87) 0.009
FLT3-ITDe 0.48 (0.14–1.63) 0.24
NPM1 f 0.50 (0.15–1.69) 0.27
CEBPA f 1.19 (0.40–3.50) 0.76
DNMT3A f 1.25 (0.42–3.68) 0.69
IDH2 f 6.37 (0.76–53.48) 0.09 13.30 (1.23–143.32) 0.03
NRAS f 3.55 (0.45–27.94) 0.23
KRAS f 6.46 (1.37–30.46) 0.02 9.17 (1.72–48.86) 0.009
SETBP1 f 6.37 (0.76–53.48) 0.09 4.52 (0.48–42.10) 0.19

Hazard ratio > 1 or Hazard ratio < 1 indicate a higher or lower risk. Only variables with a univariable P ≤ 0.20 were included in the multivariable models. Mutations such as IDH1 and TP53 were either not analyzed or detected in our cohort, thus they were not included in this analysis

CI confidence interval, WBC white blood cells, CN-AML cytogenetically normal AML, ITD internal tandem duplication

aLow vs high expression

b > 60 vs ≤ 60 years

c ≥ 30 vs < 30 × 109/L

dAdverse vs intermediate vs favorable

ePresent vs absent

fMutated vs wild type