Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 30;122(12):1760–1768. doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-0846-2

Table 3.

Summary of tumour sample immunohistochemical analyses and correlation with PFS and OS.

CON (n = 65) SEQ (n = 63) HR, 95% CI for PFS HR, 95% CI for OS
Tumour grade
 Well differentiated/moderately differentiated 2 (4%)/38 (67%) 2 (4%)/38 (72%) 0.65, 0.41–1.04 0.86, 0.53–1.39
 Poorly differentiated 17 (30%) 13 (24%) 0.77, 0.35–1.70 1.08, 0.50–2.33
 Unknowna 8 10
 Prognostic: p log rank = 0.41 (PFS), 0.12 (OS)
CDA expression—tumour epithelium
 Negative/weakly positive/positive 3 (6%)/8 (15%)/ 25 (47%) 0/10 (19%)/25 (48%) 0.91, 0.56–1.48 1.07, 0.65–1.76
 Strongly positive 17 (32%) 17 (33%) 0.31, 0.13–0.70 0.74, 0.36–1.56
 Unknowna 12 11
 Prognostic: p log rank = 0.24 (PFS), 0.88 (OS)
CDA expression—stromal cells
 Weakly positive/positive 14 (34%)/22 (54%) 17 (40%)/21 (50%) 0.74, 0.46–1.20 1.10, 0.67–1.79
 Strongly positive 5 (12%) 4 (10%) 0.73, 0.17–3.07 1.49, 0.33–6.81
 Unknowna 24 21
 Prognostic: p log rank = 0.12 (PFS), 0.48 (OS)
Presence of tumour stroma
 None/minimal 11 (19%)/14 (24%) 7 (13%)/24 (45%) 0.56, 0.30–1.03 0.79, 0.45–1.38
 Moderate/extensive 19 (33%)/14 (24%) 13 (24%)/9 (17%) 0.60, 0.34–1.06 0.85, 0.47–1.53
 Unknowna 7 10
 Prognostic: p log rank = 0.027 (PFS), 0.023 (OS)

aUnknown = insufficient tumour sample to analyse.