Radiation Oncology

Table 2 Predictors of locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis identified using a Cox proportional hazards model

From: Prognostic values of mid-radiotherapy ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in patients with esophageal cancer

	Locoregional recurrence			Distant metastasis
	Univariate analysis			Univariate analysis
	HR	95% CI	p value	HR	95% CI	p value
Patient factor
ECOG PS (0–1 vs. 2)	4.21	0.44–39.93	0.21	0.47	0.11–1.93	0.29
Stage
I – IIIA vs. IIIB, IIIC	49.49	0.01–180,664.89	0.35	0.67	0.15–2.94	0.59
PET1
SUV_max	0.96	0.81–1.13	0.62	0.95	0.84–1.07	0.37
SUV_mean	0.89	0.63–1.25	0.49	0.85	0.66–1.09	0.21
MTV^a	1.00	0.96–1.05	0.84	1.00	0.96–1.03	0.85
TLG^a	1.00	1.00–1.00	0.93	1.00	1.00–1.00	0.59
GTV^a	1.00	0.97–1.03	0.84	1.01	0.99–1.03	0.42
PET2
SUV_max	1.24	0.95–1.63	0.12	1.08	0.90–1.29	0.42
SUV_mean	1.92	0.80–4.62	0.15	1.54	0.90–2.65	0.12
MTV^a	1.02	0.96–1.09	0.48	1.01	0.95–1.06	0.80
TLG^a	1.01	1.00–1.02	0.29	1.00	0.99–1.01	0.75
GTV^a	0.99	0.94–1.04	0.64	1.02	0.99–1.05	0.17
Relative difference
ΔSUV_max	0.98	0.95–1.00	0.09	0.97	0.94–0.99	0.01
ΔSUV_mean	0.98	0.95–1.01	0.18	0.95	0.91–0.98	0.00
ΔMTV	0.97	0.95–0.99	0.01	1.00	0.98–1.02	0.76
ΔTLG	0.98	0.96–0.99	0.01	0.98	0.96–1.00	0.04
ΔGTV	1.01	0.97–1.05	0.67	1.00	0.97–1.03	0.82
	Locoregional recurrence			Distant metastasis
	Multivariate analysis			Multivariate analysis
	HR	95% CI	p value	HR	95% CI	p value
Relative difference
ΔSUV_max	0.98	0.94–1.02	0.32	1.04	0.98–1.11	0.22
ΔSUV_mean				0.90	0.82–0.99	0.02
ΔMTV	0.98	0.96–1.00	0.03
ΔTLG	1.24	0.80–1.56	0.12	1.00	0.98–1.02	0.75

The foreparts of the parentheses were set as the reference groups
Abbreviations: ECOG PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, SUV_max maximum standardized uptake value, SUV_mean mean standardized uptake value, MTV metabolic tumor volume, TLG total lesion glycolysis, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval
^aLog transformed

Back to article page

ISSN: 1748-717X

Contact us

General enquiries: journalsubmissions@springernature.com