Table 2.
Variable | Group | HR | CI (95%) | P-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age | <60 | 0.607 | 0.298–1.236 | 0.169 |
> = 60 | ||||
Gender | 1.295 | 0.577–2.908 | 0.531 | |
Female | ||||
TumorLocation | Rectum | 0.833 | 0.43–1.615 | 0.589 |
Colon | ||||
TumorSize | <3 | 1.572 | 0.774–3.193 | 0.211 |
> = 3 | ||||
Lymph Node | No | 2.823 | 1.294–6.162 | 0.009* |
Metastasis | Yes | |||
TNM | I,II | 0.887 | 0.445–1.77 | 0.734 |
III,IV | ||||
DistanceMetastasis | No | 2.15 | 1.089–4.246 | 0.027* |
Yes | ||||
LINC01354 | Low | 2.264 | 1.106–4.634 | 0.025* |
Expression | High |
Proportional hazards method analysis showed a positive, independent prognostic importance of Lymph Node Metastasis (P = 0.012) and LINC01354 expression (P = 0.023). *P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant