Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 14;13:10453–10464. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S272553

Table 2.

Univariate and Multivariate Cox Regression Analyses of PFS in 367 Enrolled ccRCC Patients

Covariates Univariate Analysis Multivariate Analysis
HR (95% CI) p value HR (95% CI) p value
Age at surgery 1.014 (1.002–1.026) 0.025* 1.006 (0.994–1.019) 0.330
Sex (male vs female) 0.756 (0.556–1.030) 0.076
Invasion deep (T1/T2 vs T3/T4) 9.811 (6.946–13.858) <0.001* 1.313 (0.726–2.374) 0.368
Lymph node metastasis (N0 vs N1) 12.235 (8.318–17.997) <0.001* 2.389 (1.468–3.888) <0.001*
Distant metastasis (M0 vs M1) 8.781 (6.293–12.253) <0.001* 1.735 (1.076–2.799) 0.024*
pTNM stage (Ⅰ/Ⅱ vs III/Ⅳ) 12.538 (8.885–17.694) <0.001* 4.148 (2.046–8.409) <0.001*
ISUP grade (1/2 vs 3/4) 2.760 (2.054–3.709) <0.001* 1.769 (1.285–2.436) <0.001*
CD39 expression (low vs high) 1.627 (1.234–2.146) 0.001* 1.394 (1.048–1.855) 0.023*

Note: *p <0.05.

Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival; ccRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ISUP, International Society of Urological Pathology.