Skip to main content
. 2019 Apr 24;24:223–233. doi: 10.12659/AOT.913692

Table 5.

Univariate Cox models to assess the association between AI and the risk of HCC recurrence.

At least one microsatellite
exp(coef) [confint] p Code Concordance
Panel 1 2.95 [0.86, 10.09] 0.0841 . 0.5961
Panel 2 4.06 [0.94, 17.52] 0.0602 . 0.6092
Panel 3 2.01 [0.59, 6.86] 0.2663 0.5552
Panel 4 2.69 [0.62, 11.59] 0.1848 0.5683
At least one microsatellite (high-level)
exp(coef) [confint] p Code Concordance
Panel 1 2.79 [1.11, 7.01] 0.0286 * 0.6282
Panel 2 4.12 [1.49, 11.35] 0.0062 ** 0.672
Panel 3 2.79 [1.11, 7.01] 0.0286 * 0.6282
Panel 4 4.12 [1.49, 11.35] 0.0062 ** 0.672
Fractional allelic imbalance
exp(coef) [confint] p Code Concordance
Panel 1 FAI 11.64 [1.11, 122.15] 0.0407 * 0.6379
Panel 2 FAI 127.58 [4.60, 3535.44] 0.0042 ** 0.6737
Panel 3 FAI 10.04 [0.70, 143.33] 0.0891 . 0.6172
Panel 4 FAI 31.82 [2.08, 487.06] 0.0129 * 0.6627
Fractional allelic imbalance (high-level)
exp(coef) [confint] p Code Concordance
Panel 1 FAI 148.58 [9.39, 2351.75] 0.0004 *** 0.6825
Panel 2 FAI 12736.03 [192.99, 840485.78] <0.0001 *** 0.7255
Panel 3 FAI 1784.22 [40.74, 78135.33] 0.0001 *** 0.6914
Panel 4 FAI 16309.40 [298.76, 890346.50] <0.0001 *** 0.7395