Table 2.

SHR-weighted scoring for the development of the CoBRA score

SHR95% CIP valueScoring 
Age ≥55 y 1.81 1.54-2.14 <.001 
HCT-CI ≥3 1.51 1.29-1.76 <.001 
Male recipient 1.40 1.21-1.63 <.001 
GVHD prophylaxis other than Tac/MTX 1.36 1.16-1.58 <.001 
PS 2-4 1.29 1.03-1.62 .028 
HLA mismatch ≥2 1.22 0.94-1.59 .14 
Refined DRI high-risk 1.18 1.02-1.36 .027 
MAC 1.15 0.98-1.35 .088 
CD34+ cell doses <0.82 × 105/kg 1.12 0.98-1.29 .10 
SHR95% CIP valueScoring 
Age ≥55 y 1.81 1.54-2.14 <.001 
HCT-CI ≥3 1.51 1.29-1.76 <.001 
Male recipient 1.40 1.21-1.63 <.001 
GVHD prophylaxis other than Tac/MTX 1.36 1.16-1.58 <.001 
PS 2-4 1.29 1.03-1.62 .028 
HLA mismatch ≥2 1.22 0.94-1.59 .14 
Refined DRI high-risk 1.18 1.02-1.36 .027 
MAC 1.15 0.98-1.35 .088 
CD34+ cell doses <0.82 × 105/kg 1.12 0.98-1.29 .10 

SHR, subdistribution hazard ratio.

We constructed the CoBRA score using the backward elimination method. Eliminating disease and CFU-GM from the multivariable model with all aforementioned variables could result in a decreased AIC. Thus, we determined to exclude these factors from the model, and performed a multivariable analysis for NRM using the remaining covariates. Finally, SHR-weighted scoring was assigned to the variables.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal