Table 5

Survival prediction of WGCNA, WGCNA* and COX groups in a multivariate Cox proportional-hazards (CPH) model

CPH Model Predictors

WGCNA

WGCNA*

COX


HR (CI)

p-value

HR (CI)

p-value

HR (CI)

p-value


Moderate Mortality

3.1 (0.5,19)

0.220

1.5 (0.3,7.3)

0.635

17.5 (1.7,178)

0.016

High Mortality

5.9 (1.1,31)

0.037

3.8 (0.8,18)

0.094

11.0 (1.2,102)

0.036

Lymph Node Involvement

0.9 (0.3,3.3)

0.900

1.1 (0.3,4.0)

0.879

1.2 (0.3,5.0)

0.767

Metastases

5.5 (0.4,72)

0.200

4.4 (0.3,58)

0.261

3.1 (0.2,59)

0.446

Stage

1.9 (0.5,7.7)

0.370

2.2 (0.5,8.9)

0.284

2.7 (0.4,17)

0.296

Her2+

2.9 (0.8,11)

0.120

3.0 (0.8,10)

0.091

1.7 (0.5,6.0)

0.433


# Observations

66

66

60

Model R2 (p-value)

0.326 (1.2 × 10-4)

0.306 (1.1 × 10-4)

0.386 (4.7 × 10-5)


Hazard ratios (HR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported for each model along with coefficient p-values. WGCNA and COX patient mortality groups predicted survival at p < 0.05, and the overall model R2 and p-values were similar across all three models. The COX model achieved the strongest hazards ratios for the moderate and high mortality groups. Her2+ was the strongest variable predictor but did not achieve significance at the 0.05 level. Variables were selected for multivariate analysis if they were significantly related to survival in a univariate CPH model (p < 0.05).

Presson et al. BMC Cancer 2011 11:230   doi:10.1186/1471-2407-11-230

Open Data