Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 15;12(10):6584–6598.

Table 4.

Analysis of factors affecting PFS

Items Cox’s proportional hazard regression model

P value HR 95% CI

Lower Higher
Univariate Cox’s regression
Therapy
    Apatinib Reference - - -
    Apatinib plus cTACE 0.004 0.196 0.066 0.587
    Apatinib plus DEB-TACE <0.001 0.068 0.019 0.240
Age (>60 years vs. ≤60 years) 0.763 1.124 0.526 2.400
Gender (male vs. female) 0.249 1.592 0.722 3.509
Wight (>60 kg vs. ≤60 kg) 0.804 1.099 0.523 2.309
HBV (positive vs. negative) 0.862 1.068 0.508 2.247
ECOG score (2 vs. 1) 0.045 2.310 1.018 5.244
Child-Pugh stage (B vs. A) 0.677 1.207 0.498 2.924
Number of intrahepatic tumors (>3 vs. ≤3) 0.015 2.959 1.232 7.106
Macroscopic vascular invasion (yes vs. no) 0.462 1.347 0.609 2.980
Tumor size (>5 cm vs. ≤5 cm) 0.676 1.202 0.507 2.848
Lymph node metastasis (yes vs. no) 0.470 1.402 0.560 3.511
Distant metastasis (yes vs. no) 0.029 2.845 1.112 7.277
TNM stage (IV vs. III) 0.040 2.526 1.043 6.118
CA199 (abnormal vs. normal) 0.119 1.942 0.843 4.478
Bile duct dilatation (yes vs. no) 0.709 1.162 0.528 2.557
Biliary drainage (yes vs. no) 0.694 0.820 0.306 2.200
Previous therapy (yes vs. no) 0.993 0.996 0.431 2.302
Forward stepwise multivariate Cox’s regression
Therapy
    Apatinib Reference - - -
    Apatinib plus cTACE <0.001 0.090 0.025 0.325
    Apatinib plus DEB-TACE <0.001 0.025 0.005 0.116
ECOG score (2 vs. 1) 0.001 6.213 2.221 17.382
Distant metastasis (yes vs. no) 0.002 5.417 1.863 15.750
CA199 (abnormal vs. normal) 0.017 3.012 1.218 7.449

Factors affecting PFS were analyzed by univariate and forward stepwise multivariate Cox’s proportional hazard regression model.

normal: CA199 level ≤27.0 U/mL, abnormal: CA199 level >27.0 U/mL.

PFS, progression-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; cTACE, conventional transarterial chemoembolization; DEB-TACE, drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization; HBV, hepatitis B virus; ECOG, Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group; CA199, carbohydrate antigen 199.