Skip to main content

Table 2 Univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis for the survival of gastric carcinoma patients

From: Individual and co-expression patterns of nerve growth factor and heme oxygenase-1 predict shorter survival of gastric carcinoma patients

Characteristics No. OS   RFS  
   HR (95% CI) p HR (95% CI) p
Age, years, ≥ 60 (vs < 60) 117/167 1.232 (0.783-1.936) 0.367 1.169 (0.753-1.812) 0.487
Sex, male (vs female) 126/167 0.974 (0.608-1.559) 0.912 1.038 (0.650-1.657) 0.876
CEAa, elevated (vs normal) 30/137 2.087 (1.266-3.440) 0.004 1.948 (1.188-3.194) 0.008
CA19-9a, elevated (vs normal) 16/137 2.571 (1.407-4.696) 0.002 2.314 (1.272-4.211) 0.006
Tumor stage, III & IV (vs I & II) 90/167 5.309 (3.250-8.671) <0.001 5.225 (3.252-8.393) <0.001
Lymph node metastasis, presence (vs absence) 110/167 4.223 (2.448-7.286) <0.001 4.311 (2.536-7.328) <0.001
Venous invasion, presence (vs absence) 30/167 2.901 (1.827-4.607) <0.001 2.789 (1.762-4.413) <0.001
Tumor invasion, AGC (vs EGC) 134/167 4.105 (1.959-8.601) <0.001 4.429 (2.118-9.262) <0.001
Histologic gradeb, WD 11/117 1 0.039 1 0.037
 MD 65/117 2.713 (0.837-8.797) 0.096 2.832 (0.874-9.170) 0.083
 PD 41/117 4.042 (1.229-13.294) 0.022 4.143 (1.262-13.602) 0.019
NGF, positive (vs negative) 68/167 1.943 (1.290-2.927) 0.001 1.932 (1.294-2.886) 0.001
HO1, positive (vs negative) 85/167 2.358 (1.532-3.630) <0.001 2.185 (1.438-3.321) <0.001
NGF/HO1 expression, −/− 60/167 1 <0.001 1 <0.001
 −/+ or +/− 62/167 2.348 (1.365-4.037) 0.002 2.019 (1.203-3.389) 0.008
 +/+ 45/167 3.489 (1.995-6.101) <0.001 3.218 (1.888-5.487) <0.001
  1. Abbreviations: HR hazard ratio, EGC early gastric cancer, AGC advanced gastric cancer
  2. aThe data for the serum levels of CEA and CA19-9 were available in 137 and 137 patients, respectively
  3. bHistologic grading was carried in tubular and papillary type carcinomas according to the grading system of the WHO histological classification of gastric tumors