Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of multivariate analysis for OS, DFS, pelvic control and distant control

From: Comparison of treatment outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy

Variables

OS

DFS

Pelvic control

Distant control

HR

p

HR

P

HR

P

HR

P

Age (< 65 vs ≥65)

2.07 (1.27–3.36)

0.004

      

Histology (SCC vs AC)

2.21 (1.31–3.74)

0.003

2.37 (1.57–3.56)

< 0.001

2.40 (1.36–4.22)

0.002

2.27 (1.31–3.92)

0.003

FIGO stage (I, II and III-IVA)

1.84 (1.33–2.56)

< 0.001

1.56 (1.20–2.04)

0.001

1.41 (0.96–2.06)

0.079

1.46 (1.03–2.07)

0.036

Tumour size (< 4 cm vs ≥4 cm)

2.00 (1.28–3.14)

0.002

1.80 (1.27–2.54)

0.001

1.81 (1.08–3.03)

0.024

1.70 (1.10–2.65)

0.018

Para-aortic MLNs (No vs Yes)

1.28 (0.69–2.40)

0.434

1.40 (0.85–2.33)

0.188

2.42 (1.25–4.68)

0.008

0.73 (0.35–1.56)

0.420

Pelvic MLNs (No vs Yes)

1.43 (0.91–2.24)

0.125

1.54 (1.08–2.22)

0.018

1.62 (0.97–2.71)

0.065

1.49 (0.93–2.38)

0.097

Common iliac MLNs (No vs Yes)

1.30 (0.72–2.35)

0.392

1.08 (0.65–1.78)

0.773

0.69 (0.34–1.40)

0.304

1.67 (0.88–3.17)

0.119

Number of pelvic MLNs (continuous)

1.16 (1.07–1.26)

0.001

1.14 (1.06–1.23)

0.001

1.13 (1.03–1.25)

0.009

1.13 (1.02–1.25)

0.018

Concurrent chemotherapy (No vs Yes)

0.85 (0.55–1.29)

0.440

0.72 (0.51–1.01)

0.059

    
  1. AC adenocarcinoma, CI confidence interval, FIGO the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, HR hazard ratio, MLNs metastatic lymph nodes, SCC squamous cell carcinoma