Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Apr 16.
Published in final edited form as: Head Neck. 2020 May 14;42(9):2375–2389. doi: 10.1002/hed.26244

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

The association between E6%FL influence score and tumor characteristics and clinical features. (A) box plot showing the significant difference in E6%FL influence score by clinical T classification (p=0.00363), tumor anatomical site (p=0.0027), HPV integration status (p=0.0051) and smoking status (p=0.019). (B) the Kaplan-Meier curves showing the significant segregation of overall survival among TCGA patients with HPV16-positive HNSC by E6%FL influence score. Both optimal (left, N = 44 in lower-risk group and N = 10 in higher-risk group at day 0) and median score (right, N = 27 in each sub-group at day 0) cutoffs showed that patients with higher E6%FL influence scores had significantly better survival (Cox proportional hazards: p=0.00027 and 0.024 respectively)