Table 4.

Cox regression analysis of prognostic factors for survival from diagnosis



Univariate

Multivariate

HR
95% CI
P
HR
95% CI
P
AF1q expression, high versus low   2.41   1.19-4.88   .015   3.05   1.31-7.09   .009  
Timing, standard versus intensive   1.24   1.02-1.49   .03   0.88   0.39-1.98   .758  
WBC, at least 100 versus fewer than 100, mm3  1.29   1.02-1.62   .033   1.41   0.60-3.35   .430  
Race, nonwhite versus white   1.30   1.07-1.59   .008   0.94   0.41-2.19   .893  
ras gene, activated versus wild type   2.04   1.15-3.63   .015   1.76   0.67-4.65   .254  
FLT3/ITD, positive versus negative   1.78   0.89-3.54   .101   1.13   0.39-3.30   .820  
FAB, M1 versus other FAB   1.24   0.51-3.03   .636   0.74   0.27-2.03   .557  
Cytogenetics, high-risk versus other
 
1.53
 
0.91-2.59
 
.111
 

 

 

 


Univariate

Multivariate

HR
95% CI
P
HR
95% CI
P
AF1q expression, high versus low   2.41   1.19-4.88   .015   3.05   1.31-7.09   .009  
Timing, standard versus intensive   1.24   1.02-1.49   .03   0.88   0.39-1.98   .758  
WBC, at least 100 versus fewer than 100, mm3  1.29   1.02-1.62   .033   1.41   0.60-3.35   .430  
Race, nonwhite versus white   1.30   1.07-1.59   .008   0.94   0.41-2.19   .893  
ras gene, activated versus wild type   2.04   1.15-3.63   .015   1.76   0.67-4.65   .254  
FLT3/ITD, positive versus negative   1.78   0.89-3.54   .101   1.13   0.39-3.30   .820  
FAB, M1 versus other FAB   1.24   0.51-3.03   .636   0.74   0.27-2.03   .557  
Cytogenetics, high-risk versus other
 
1.53
 
0.91-2.59
 
.111
 

 

 

 

— indicates we were unable to obtain estimate because cytogenetics had zero variance when added to the multivariate model.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal