Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 5;13(4):643. doi: 10.3390/cancers13040643

Table 3.

Multivariate analysis of factors associated with the risk of progression among patients with NEC.

HR (95%CI) p Value
Model 1: Rbinap
Lung primary (vs. other locations) 1.39 (0.75–2.58) 0.301
SCNEC (vs. LCNEC) 0.54 (0.29–1.03) 0.06
Ki-67 (each additional 1%) 1.02 (1–1.03) 0.028
Extra-hepatic metastases (vs. absence) 1.04 (0.62–1.75) 0.87
Rbinap (vs. Rbapp) 0.57 (0.32–1.02) 0.058
Model 2: Rb < 150
Lung primary (vs. other locations) 1.31 (0.71–2.42) 0.393
SCNEC (vs. LCNEC) 0.59 (0.31–1.1) 0.097
Ki-67 (each additional 1%) 1.02 (1.00–1.04) 0.014
Extra-hepatic metastases (vs. absence) 1.1 (0.66–1.84) 0.712
Rb < 150 (vs. Rb score ≥ 150) 0.37 (0.17–0.8) 0.012
Model 3: p16high
Lung primary (vs. other locations) 1.59 (0.82–3.09) 0.167
SCNEC (vs. LCNEC) 0.54 (0.27–1.09) 0.086
Ki-67 (each additional 1%) 1.02 (1–1.04) 0.018
Extra-hepatic metastases (vs. absence) 1.19 (0.71–1.98) 0.518
p16high (vs. p16low) 0.39 (0.19–0.79) 0.009

HR, Hazard ratio; 95%CI, 95% confidence interval; SCNEC, small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; LCNEC, large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; NEN, neuroendocrine neoplasm.