Table 2.
Association of MUC1 expression level and selected patient characteristics.
| MUC1 analyzed subpopulation, n = (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical and histopathological features | MUC1 low n = 135 (85) | MUC1 high n = 23 (15) | p = |
| Age | .018 | ||
| median (range), y | 61 (36–79) | 67 (37–81) | |
| <65 years | 90 (67) | 9 (39) | |
| ≥65 years | 45 (33) | 14 (61) | |
| Karnofsky performance status scale | .999 | ||
| median (range), % | 80 (50–100) | 80 (70–100) | |
| >80% | 93 (69) | 16 (70) | |
| ≤80% | 42 (31) | 7 (30) | |
| Gender, (%) | .649 | ||
| male | 79 (59) | 15 (65) | |
| female | 56 (41) | 8 (35) | |
| T stage, (%) | .471 | ||
| T1–2 | 15 (11) | 1 (4) | |
| T3–4 | 120 (89) | 22 (96) | |
| Nodal status, (%) | .586 | ||
| N− | 28 (21) | 6 (26) | |
| N+ | 107 (79) | 17 (74) | |
| Grading, (%) | .171 | ||
| G1–2 | 80 (60) | 10 (43) | |
| G3 | 53 (40) | 13 (57) | |
| Resection margin, (%) | .152 | ||
| R0 | 112 (83) | 16 (70) | |
| R1 | 23 (17) | 7 (30) | |
| Treatment arm, (%) | .257 | ||
| Gemcitabin | 78 (58) | 10 (43) | |
| Observation | 57 (42) | 13 (57) | |
Grading was not available in all cases. T1–2, T1–2 stage; T3–4; T3–4 stage; N−, nodal negative stage; N+ nodal positive stage; R0, R0 resection stage; R1, R1 resection stage.