Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Apr 15.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Jul 29;25(20):6170–6179. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-0318

Table 3:

Intratumoral F. nucleatum burden correlates with worse chemotherapeutic response in ESCC patients

Characteristics Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
OR (95% CI) P OR (95% CI) P
RECIST
 Age (vs >= 65) 1.47 (0.65 – 3.41) 0.35
 Male (vs Female) 2.42 (0.68 – 11.3) 0.18
 Upper tumor location (vs lower) 1.14 (0.48 – 2.74) 0.77
 T category, 3–4 (vs 1–2) 0.83 (0.34 – 2.03) 0.68
 Lymph node metastasis 5.88 (1.02 – 111) 0.04 6.95 (1.19 – 135) 0.03
F. nucleatum High (vs Low ) 2.72 (1.12 – 6.78) 0.03 2.97 (1.19 – 7.73) 0.02
PET/CT
 Age (vs >= 65) 1.65 (0.57 – 5.18) 0.35
 Male (vs Female) 2.10 (0.34 – 40.6) 0.47
 Upper tumor location (vs lower) 0.92 (0.32 – 2.93) 0.89
 T category, 3–4 (vs 1–2) 10.0 (1.89 – 186) 0.004 9.74 (1.66 – 187) 0.008
 Lymph node metastasis 0.43 (0.09 – 2.27) 0.3
F. nucleatum High (vs Low) 7.84 (2.58 – 25.4) 0.0003 7.66 (2.37 – 26.8) 0.0006
TRG
 Age (vs >= 65) 0.56 (0.20 – 1.49) 0.25
 Male (vs Female) 0.25 (0.01 – 1.38) 0.13
 Upper tumor location (vs lower) 1.53 (0.57 – 4.02) 0.39
 T category, 3–4 (vs 1–2) 2.56 (0.95 – 6.85) 0.06 2.05 (0.74 – 5.70) 0.17
 Lymph node metastasis 1.88 (0.36 – 7.48) 0.45
F. nucleatum High (vs Low) 11.6 (2.25 – 214) 0.001 10.3 (1.96 – 190) 0.003