Comparative HRs for survival in each participating center
. | Intermediate versus favorable risk . | . | . | High versus intermediate risk . | . | . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | HR . | 95% CI . | P . | HR . | 95% CI . | P . | ||||
| Hopkins | 3.7 | 1.4, 9.3 | .007 | 6.9 | 3.8, 12.4 | <.0001 | ||||
| Nebraska | 2.3 | 1.0, 5.3 | .06 | 1.6 | 0.6, 4.0 | .34 | ||||
| IBMTR | 3.3 | 1.9, 5.7 | <.001 | 2.5 | 1.7, 3.7 | <.001 | ||||
| FHCRC | 8.9 | 1.2, 66.9 | .03 | 1.6 | 0.8, 3.3 | .22 | ||||
| Minnesota | 2.6 | 0.8, 8.8 | .12 | 1.6 | 1.0, 2.7 | .07 | ||||
. | Intermediate versus favorable risk . | . | . | High versus intermediate risk . | . | . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | HR . | 95% CI . | P . | HR . | 95% CI . | P . | ||||
| Hopkins | 3.7 | 1.4, 9.3 | .007 | 6.9 | 3.8, 12.4 | <.0001 | ||||
| Nebraska | 2.3 | 1.0, 5.3 | .06 | 1.6 | 0.6, 4.0 | .34 | ||||
| IBMTR | 3.3 | 1.9, 5.7 | <.001 | 2.5 | 1.7, 3.7 | <.001 | ||||
| FHCRC | 8.9 | 1.2, 66.9 | .03 | 1.6 | 0.8, 3.3 | .22 | ||||
| Minnesota | 2.6 | 0.8, 8.8 | .12 | 1.6 | 1.0, 2.7 | .07 | ||||
P values are 2-sided