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