Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 2;21:5–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.11.006

Table 1.

Associations between patient and tumor parameters and development of liver or lung metastasis, calculated by univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; IMV, inferior mesenteric vein; TRG, tumor regression grade (histologic tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy).

Liver metastasis
Lung metastasis
Univariable analysis n HR (95% CI) p n HR (95% CI) p
Sex (male as reference) 545 1.93 (1.03–3.61) 0.040 538 0.55 (0.32–0.97) 0.037
Increasing age 545 0.36 (0.09–1.38) 0.14 538 1.05 (0.22–4.94) 0.95
Increasing BMI 225 2.07 (0.18–24.3) 0.56 215 1.75 (0.09–35.0) 0.72
Increasing IMV diameter 102 23.21 (1.06–507) 0.046 88 0.13 (0.02–7.52) 0.32
Increasing tumor distance from the anal verge 376 0.99 (0.95–1.04) 0.80 370 0.99 (0.94–1.03) 0.57
Increasing tumor volume 189 1.86 (1.20–2.87) 0.005 170 0.86 (0.51–1.45) 0.57
TRG (1 as reference) 315 3.69 (1.66–8.23) 0.001 313 1.09 (0.56–2.10) 0.80



Liver metastasis
Multivariable analysis
n
HR (95% CI)
p
Sex (male as reference) 121 2.88 (0.95–8.73) 0.062
Increasing tumor volume 121 1.01 (0.61–1.68) 0.75
TRG (1 as reference) 121 4.67 (1.76–12.4) 0.002

A certain number of patients died or were lost to follow-up without occurrence of a metastatic event or available clinical data varied for the different calculations, which explains patient numbers (n) different from the total of 550. In addition, BMI, tumor distance from the anal verge, and TRG were missing for one of the cohorts, and tumor volume was determined only for selected patients in two of the cohorts. IMV diameter was determined in only one cohort.