Figure 2
Overall survival comparisons between the IMRAW and French-EPO cohorts. (A) Overall survival comparison between the IMRAW and French-EPO cohorts restricted to IPSS low or int-1 without unfavorable karyotype, since diagnosis for IMRAW and since introduction of rEPO for French-EPO cohort. (IMRAW: n = 225 patients [dotted curve]; French-EPO: n = 284 patients [plain curve].) (B) Overall survival comparison between the IMRAW and French-EPO cohorts restricted to IPSS LOW INT1 without unfavorable karyotype, according to response to rEPO: IMRAW: n = 225 (solid black curve), French-EPO (rEPO responders: n = 195 [dashed gray curve]; rEPO nonresponders: n = 99 [solid gray curve]). P was less than .001 between IMRAW and rEPO responders, and P = .17 between IMRAW and rEPO nonresponders. (C) Matched-pair analysis with 200 patients in the IMRAW database and 200 patients in the French-EPO cohort.

Overall survival comparisons between the IMRAW and French-EPO cohorts. (A) Overall survival comparison between the IMRAW and French-EPO cohorts restricted to IPSS low or int-1 without unfavorable karyotype, since diagnosis for IMRAW and since introduction of rEPO for French-EPO cohort. (IMRAW: n = 225 patients [dotted curve]; French-EPO: n = 284 patients [plain curve].) (B) Overall survival comparison between the IMRAW and French-EPO cohorts restricted to IPSS LOW INT1 without unfavorable karyotype, according to response to rEPO: IMRAW: n = 225 (solid black curve), French-EPO (rEPO responders: n = 195 [dashed gray curve]; rEPO nonresponders: n = 99 [solid gray curve]). P was less than .001 between IMRAW and rEPO responders, and P = .17 between IMRAW and rEPO nonresponders. (C) Matched-pair analysis with 200 patients in the IMRAW database and 200 patients in the French-EPO cohort.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal