Table 4.
Uni- and multivariate Cox’s analyses for local control.
| Factor | N of Data | N of Event (%) | Level | Univariate HR (95% CI) |
P | Multivariate HR (95% CI) |
P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥ vs. <82 years old 1 | 2.88 (0.55, 15.0) | 0.21 | ||
| Sex | 71 | 9 (13) | Male vs. Female | 0.74 (0.17, 3.24) | 0.69 | ||
| Performance status | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥1 vs. 0 | 0.26 (0.06, 1.13) | 0.07 | ||
| Major underlying liver disease | 71 | 9 (13) | NAFLD vs. Others | 0.96 (0.24, 3.94) | 0.96 | ||
| Treatment history | 71 | 9 (13) | +(recurrence or IM) vs.-(primary tumor) | 1.04 (0.25, 4.24) | 0.96 | ||
| Longest tumor diameter | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥ vs. <32 mm1 | 9.10 (1.07, 77.2) | 0.043 | 1.10 (0.02, 73.5) | 0.96 |
| Tumor volume | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥ vs. <25.6 cc 1 | 10.4 (1.22, 88.0) | 0.032 | 0.11 (0.002, 6.94) | 0.30 |
| Child–Pugh score | 71 | 9 (13) | A6, B7 vs. A5 | 0.24 (0.03, 2.08) | 0.20 | ||
| TNM (UICC8th) | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥T2 vs. T1 | 0.52 (0.06, 4.57) | 0.57 | ||
| Okuda staging | 71 | 9 (13) | II vs. I | 0.84 (0.09, 7.67) | 0.88 | ||
| BCLC staging | 71 | 9 (13) | B–D vs. 0, A | 2.51 (0.60, 10.6) | 0.21 | ||
| Liver damage | 71 | 9 (13) | B vs. A | 0.21 (0.03, 1.81) | 0.16 | ||
| HH15 | 71 | 9 (13) | >0.55 vs. ≤0.55 2 | 0.33 (0.08, 1.41) | 0.14 | ||
| LHL15 | 71 | 9 (13) | <0.92 vs. ≥0.92 2 | 1.36 (0.15, 12.2) | 0.78 | ||
| ICGR15 | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥10 vs. <10 %2 | 0.86 (0.09, 8.08) | 0.89 | ||
| K-ICG | 71 | 9 (13) | <0.15 vs. ≥0.15, ≤0.22% | 1.36 (0.15, 12.2) | 0.78 | ||
| ALBI grade | 71 | 9 (13) | 2, 3 vs. 1 | 0.44 (0.10, 1.92) | 0.27 | ||
| FIB-4 index | 71 | 9 (13) | ≥2.67 vs. <2.67 | 0.86 (0.09, 8.08) | 0.89 | ||
| Treatment options | 71 | 9 (13) | Inoperable vs. operable | 2.37 (0.45, 12.3) | 0.31 | ||
| 71 | 9 (13) | RFA untreatable vs. treatable | - 3 | - 3 | |||
| 71 | 9 (13) | TACE untreatable vs. treatable | 1.56 (0.38, 6.44) | 0.54 | |||
| Dose fractionation | 71 | 9 (13) | 72.6 GyRBE/22 Fr vs. 66 GyRBE/10 Fr | 2.83 (0.68, 11.72) | 0.15 | ||
| Vicinity to the gastrointestinal tract | 71 | 9 (13) | ≤ vs. >1 cm | 5.29 (1.19, 23.6) | 0.029 | 0.25 (0.05, 1.22) | 0.08 |
| Alpha fetoprotein | 71 | 9 (13) | > 20 vs. ≤20 ng/mL 2 | 2.34 (0.59, 10.1) | 0.22 | ||
| PIVKA-II | 71 | 9 (13) | > 40 vs. ≤40 mAU/mL 2 | 3.08 (0.59, 16.0) | 0.18 |
1 Cut-off value was the median value; 2 cut-off value was the upper limit of normal reference levels; 3 no patients with RFA treatable had local control failure.