Table 2.
The univariate analysis of logistic regression model using selected risk factors related to pathological complete response (N = 236).
| Variables | OR | 95% C.I | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||
| Male vs. female | 3.53 | 2.41–5.17 | < 0.001 |
| Age | 1.02 | 1.01–1.02 | < 0.001 |
| Chemotherapy | |||
| FOLFOX vs. fluoropyrimidine | 2.53 | 1.75–3.64 | < 0.001 |
| Tumor location | |||
| Upper vs. low/middle | 4.28 | 2.56–7.15 | < 0.001 |
| Clinical T stage | |||
| T2 vs. T3 | 2.92 | 2.09–4.06 | < 0.001 |
| T2 vs. T4 | 6.80 | 2.66–17.4 | < 0.001 |
| Clinical N stage | |||
| N0 vs. N1 | 3.68 | 2.47–5.47 | < 0.001 |
| N0 vs. N2 | 4.00 | 2.07–7.75 | < 0.001 |
| TNM stage | |||
| II vs. III | 3.76 | 2.68–5.29 | < 0.001 |
| Tumor grade | |||
| Well differentiation vs. moderate differentiation | 3.00 | 2.20–4.09 | < 0.001 |
| Well differentiation vs. poor differentiation | 3.68 | 2.40–6.97 | < 0.001 |
| Pre-CRT CEA (ng/mL) | |||
| ≦ 5 vs. > 5 | 4.75 | 2.77–8.14 | < 0.001 |
| Anemia | |||
| Grade 0–1 vs. grade 2–3 | 3.32 | 2.30–4.80 | < 0.001 |
| Diarrhea | |||
| Grade 0–1 vs. grade 2–3 | 2.62 | 1.80–3.83 | < 0.001 |
| Urinary symptoms | |||
| Grade 0–1 vs. grade 2–3 | 8.00 | 1.84–34.79 | 0.006 |
| Dermatitis | |||
| Grade 0–1 vs. grade 2–3 | 3.67 | 2.07–6.49 | < 0.001 |
| Leukopenia | |||
| Grade 0–1 vs. grade 2–3 | 2.89 | 2.05–4.07 | < 0.001 |
| RT-dose (cGy) | |||
| 5,000 vs. 4,500 | 2.69 | 1.94–3.74 | < 0.001 |
| 5,040 vs. 4,500 | 7.80 | 3.07–19.79 | < 0.001 |
| RT-surgery interval | |||
| > 8wk vs. ≦8wk | 2.44 | 1.73–3.46 | < 0.001 |
| Post-CRT CEA (ng/mL) | |||
| ≦ 2 vs. > 2 | 1.58 | 0.86–2.88 | < 0.001 |
CEA carcinoembryonic antigen, CI confidence interval, CRT chemoradiotherapy, FOLFOX fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, Hb hemoglobin, OR odds ratio, pCR pathological complete response, RT radiation therapy, WBC white blood cell.