Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 19;27(3):e286–e293. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac020

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics for CM and non-CM users in colorectal cancer patients from CO.20, 21, and 23.

Variable CM yes (%) N = 251 CM no (%) N = 1353 Total (%) Univariate P value
Gender
 Female 90 (35.9) 481 (35.6) 571 (35.6) .926
 Male 161 (64.1) 872 (64.4) 1033 (64.4)
Age  ∗∗
 ≤65 167 (66.5) 745 (55.1) 912 (56.9) .001
 >65 84 (33.5) 608 (44.9) 692 (43.1)
ECOG Performance Status  ∗∗
 ECOG PS 0 or 1 236 (94.0) 1159 (85.7) 1395 (87.0) <.001
 ECOG PS 2 or 3 15 (6.0) 194 (14.3) 209 (13.0)
Presence of liver metastases
 No 62 (24.7) 338 (25.0) 400 (24.9) .925
 Yes 189 (75.3) 1015 (75.0) 1204 (75.1)
Number of previous chemo drug classes
 >2 240 (95.6) 1306 (96.5) 1546 (96.4) .479
 ≤2 11 (4.4) 47 (3.5) 58 (3.6)
Number of disease sites  ∗∗
 >2 65 (25.9) 509 (37.6) 574 (35.8) < .001
 ≤2 186 (74.1) 844 (62.4) 1030 (64.2)
Hemoglobin  ∗∗
 Grade ≥1 132 (52.6) 913 (67.5) 1045 (65.1) < .001
 Grade 0 119 (47.4) 440 (32.5) 559 (34.9)
LDH
 Missing 4 (1.6) 57 (4.2) 61 (3.8) .089
 >UNL 154 (61.4) 880 (65.0) 1034 (64.5)
 ≤UNL 93 (37.1) 416 (30.7) 509 (31.7)
Alkaline phosphatase
 Missing 2 (0.8) 12 (0.9) 14 (0.9) .440
 >UNL 155 (61.8) 869 (64.2) 1024 (63.8)
 ≤UNL 94 (37.5) 472 (34.9) 566 (35.3)
Study treatment in each trial
 Napabucasin + BSC (CO23) 21 (8.4) 117 (8.6) 138 (8.6) .031
 Placebo + BSC (CO23) 23 (9.2) 121 (8.9) 144 (9.0)
 BSC (CO17) 34 (13.5) 251 (18.6) 285 (17.8)
 Cetuximab + BSC (CO17) 51 (20.3) 236 (17.4) 287 (17.9)
 Cetuximab + Brivanib (CO20) 47 (18.7) 329 (24.3) 376 (23.4)
 Cetuximab + Placebo (CO20) 75 (29.9) 299 (22.1) 374 (23.3)

∗∗Significance in univariate and multivariate analysis (P < .05)