Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 5;16(10):e1008234. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008234

Table 2. Summary of patient cohort.

Comparison of natural history (NH) cohort with chemotherapy (CT) cohort. 1Performance score–performance score using Zubrod scale, 2OS–overall survival, 3MFS–metastatic-free survival, 4response to CT–response to chemotherapy according to RECIST criteria.

NH cohort CT cohort
N = 17 N = 25
Age 67(55–78) 63 (47–76)
Sex Female 5 (30%) 5 (20%)
Male 12 (70%) 20 (80%)
Performance score1 0 5 (30%) 1 (4%)
1 7 (40%) 22 (88%)
2 5 (30%) 2 (8%)
Stage IIB 1 (6%) 0 (0%)
IIIA 1 (6%) 12 (48%)
IIIB 8 (47%) 8 (32%)
IV 7 (40%) 5 (20%)
T 1 0 (0%) 1 (4%)
2 2 (12%) 7 (28%)
3 4 (24%) 7 (28%)
4 11 (64%) 8 (32%)
x 0 (0%) 2 (8%)
N 0 3 (18%) 1 (4%)
1 1 (6%) 2 (8%)
2 8 (47%) 12 (48%)
3 4 (23%) 9 (36%)
x 1 (6%) 1 (4%)
M 0 10 (60%) 20 (80%)
1 7 (40%) 5 (20%)
Subtype squamous 14 (82%) 16 (64%)
adenocarcinoma 2 (12%) 5 (20%)
other 1 (6%) 4 (16%)
OS2 7 (1–27) 12 (1–81)
MFS3 4 (0–27) 7 (0–42)
Chemotherapeutic drugs cisplatin+ vinorelbine 22 (88%)
cisplatin+gemicitabine 3 (12%)
Response to CT4 complete response 1(4%)
partial response 5 (20%)
stable disease 5 (20%)
progressive disease 8(32%)
undetermined 6 (24%)