Table 3

Multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards analysis of EGFR clusters with clinical parameters in NKI295 data set

    Relapse Free Survival

    Overall Survival

Variable

Hazard Ratio (95% CI)

p-value

Hazard Ratio (95% CI)

p-value


Standard clinical parameters

Age, per decade

0.59 (0.43–0.81)

0.001

0.67 (0.45–0.99)

0.04

ER status

0.64 (0.42–0.98)

0.04

0.45 (0.27–0.71)

0.0009

Size

1.38 (0.94–2.02)

0.10

1.50 (0.94–2.41)

0.09

Tumor grade 2 vs. 1

2.41 (1.31–4.43)

0.005

4.30 (1.48–12.35)

0.007

Tumor grade 3 vs. 1

2.58 (1.38–4.81)

0.003

6.02 (2.09–17.35)

0.0009

Nodes 1–3 vs. 0

0.85 (0.55–1.32)

0.48

0.91 (0.53–1.56)

0.72

Nodes >3 vs. 0

1.37 (0.83–2.26)

0.22

1.56 (0.85–2.85)

0.14

Standard clinical parameters and Cluster #1

Age, per decade

0.59 (0.43–0.82)

0.002

0.67 (0.45–0.99)

0.05

ER status

0.67 (0.43–1.04)

0.08

0.45 (0.27–0.75)

0.002

Size

1.35 (0.92–1.99)

0.12

1.48 (0.92–2.39)

0.11

Tumor grade 2 vs. 1

2.26 (1.23–4.18)

0.009

4.13 (1.42–11.98)

0.009

Tumor grade 3 vs. 1

2.21 (1.16–4.22)

0.02

5.34 (1.81–17.74)

0.002

Nodes 1–3 vs. 0

0.82 (0.56–1.27)

0.38

0.86 (0.50–1.50)

0.60

Nodes >3 vs. 0

1.23 (0.73–2.06)

0.43

1.46 (0.79–2.71)

0.23

Cluster #1 med vs. low

1.53 (0.93–2.53)

0.10

1.25 (0.65–2.39)

0.50

Cluster #1 high vs. low

1.70 (1.01–2.88)

0.05

1.43 (0.76–2.69)

0.27

Standard clinical parameters and Cluster #2

Age, per decade

0.60 (0.43–0.83)

0.002

0.67 (0.452–0.99)

0.04

ER status

0.73 (0.46–1.16)

0.18

0.54 (0.32–0.91)

0.02

Size

1.41 (0.96–2.07)

0.08

1.52 (0.94–2.44)

0.09

Tumor grade 2 vs. 1

1.94 (1.05–3.61)

0.04

3.36 (1.15–9.83)

0.03

Tumor grade 3 vs. 1

1.74 (0.90–3.37)

0.10

3.54 (1.20–10.73)

0.02

Nodes 1–3 vs. 0

0.80 (0.52–1.23)

0.31

0.81 (0.47–1.39)

0.44

Nodes >3 vs. 0

1.19 (0.71–1.98)

0.51

1.36 (0.74–2.49)

0.32

Cluster #2 med vs. low

2.13 (1.22–3.71)

0.008

2.10 (0.95–4.64)

0.07

Cluster #2 high vs. low

2.63 (1.44–4.79)

0.002

3.46 (1.58–7.59)

0.002

Standard clinical parameters and Cluster #3

Age, per decade

0.58 (0.42–0.81)

0.001

0.67 (0.45–0.98)

0.04

ER status

0.68 (0.43–1.07)

0.10

0.45 (0.27–0.76)

0.003

Size

1.39 (0.95–2.03)

0.10

1.49 (0.93–2.41)

0.10

Tumor grade 2 vs. 1

2.30 (1.24–4.24)

0.008

4.13 (1.42–12.00)

0.009

Tumor grade 3 vs. 1

2.29 (1.20–4.38)

0.01

5.38 (1.83–15.80)

0.002

Nodes 1–3 vs. 0

0.83 (0.54–1.29)

0.41

0.86 (0.50–1.49)

0.60

Nodes >3 vs. 0

1.30 (0.79–2.16)

0.31

1.47 (0.80–2.70)

0.22

Cluster #3 med vs. low

1.32 (0.81–2.16)

0.26

1.54 (0.80–2.95)

0.20

Cluster #3 high vs. low

1.41 (0.84–2.37)

0.19

1.43 (0.73–2.78)

0.29


Age was a continuous variable grouped in decade years, size was a binary variable (0 = < 2 cm, 1 = > 2 cm), tumor grade 2 and 3 are relative to grade 1, and node status (1–3 nodes or > 3 nodes) was relative to 0 positive nodes. Expression of the three clusters was averaged, rank ordered, divided into equal thirds; medium and high expression is relative to low expression. Significant variables are displayed in bold.

Hoadley et al. BMC Genomics 2007 8:258   doi:10.1186/1471-2164-8-258

Open Data