Table 3.
Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses of quantitative DECT parameters in predicting the aggressiveness of OTSCC.
| Parameters | Pathologic stages | Histologic differentiation | Lymph node status | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate regression | Multivariate regression | Univariate regression | Multivariate regression | Univariate regression | Multivariate regression | |||||||
| OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | |
| λHu in AP | 0.51 (0.32,0.81) | 0.004 | 0.146 | 0.45 (0.26,0.78) | 0.004 | 0.849 | 0.66 (0.43,1.02) | 0.060 | ||||
| nIC in AP | 0.63 (0.40,0.98) | 0.039 | 0.683 | 0.59 (0.35,1.00) | 0.049 | 0.237 | 0.77 (0.50,1.16) | 0.202 | ||||
| nZeff in AP | 0.92 (0.61,1.39) | 0.695 | 0.98 (0.63,1.52) | 0.922 | 1.00 (0.66,1.50) | 0.990 | ||||||
| nRho in AP | 1.03 (0.68,1.56) | 0.895 | 1.00 (0.64,1.55) | 0.986 | 1.07 (0.71,1.61) | 0.750 | ||||||
| λHu in VP | 0.29 (0.16,0.52) | <0.001 | 0.29 (0.16,0.52) | <0.001 | 0.27 (0.13,0.54) | <0.001 | 0.098 | 0.42 (0.25,0.70) | 0.001 | 0.42 (0.25,0.70) | 0.001 | |
| nIC in VP | 0.39 (0.24,0.63) | <0.001 | 0.414 | 0.31 (0.17,0.55) | <0.001 | 0.31 (0.17,0.55) | <0.001 | 0.54 (0.35,0.85) | 0.007 | 0.905 | ||
| nZeff in VP | 0.62 (0.39,0.99) | 0.047 | 0.058 | 0.91 (0.59,1.41) | 0.683 | 0.69 (0.45,1.07) | 0.099 | |||||
| nRho in VP | 1.00 (0.66,1.51) | 0.998 | 0.88 (0.57,1.38) | 0.585 | 0.98 (0.65,1.45) | 0.933 | ||||||
DECT, Dual-energy computed tomography; OTSCC, Oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidential interval; λHu, slope of the spectral Hounsfield unit curve; nIC, normalized iodine concentration; nZeff, normalized effective atomic number; nRho, normalized electron density; AP, arterial phase; VP, venous phase.