Skip to main content

Table 3 Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses of CSS

From: Comparison of full-dose gemcitabine/cisplatin, dose-reduced gemcitabine/cisplatin, and gemcitabine/carboplatin in real-world patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma

Parameter

Cutoff

Univariate

Multivariate

HR (95% CI)

P

HR (95% CI)

P

Age (years)

Continuous

1.01 (0.99–1.04) per score

0.31

  

Sex

Male

Reference

0.62

  

Female

0.86 (0.47–1.53)

   

ECOG PS

0

Reference

0.019*

Reference

0.013*

 ≥ 1

1.89 (1.09–3.17)

 

2.04 (1.14–3.56)

 

eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2)

 < 60

Reference

0.57

  

 ≥ 60

1.16 (0.68–1.93)

   

Primary site

Bladder

Reference

   

Upper urinary tract

1.12 (0.65–1.96)

   

Both

1.70 (0.79–3.42)

   

Resection of primary site

No

Reference

0.0039*

Reference

0.067

Yes

0.48 (0.29–0.79)

 

0.61 (0.36–1.03)

 

Prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy

No

Reference

0.47

  

Yes

1.30 (0.60–2.51)

   

Lymph node metastasis

No

Reference

0.020*

Reference

0.0019*

Yes

1.91 (1.13–3.39)

 

2.51 (1.43–4.58)

 

Lung metastasis

No

Reference

0.62

  

Yes

0.88 (0.51–1.46)

   

Bone metastasis

No

Reference

0.79

  

Yes

1.10 (0.52–2.07)

   

Liver metastasis

No

Reference

0.021*

Reference

0.0045*

Yes

2.16 (1.07–3.99)

 

2.71 (1.30–5.23)

 

First-line regimens

Full-dose GC

Reference

0.37

  

Dose-reduced GC

1.03 (0.52–1.95)

   

GCa

1.45 (0.82–2.56)

   
  1. CI confidence interval, CSS cancer-specific survival, ECOG PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate, GC gemcitabine/cisplatin, GCa gemcitabine/carboplatin, HR hazard ratio
  2. *Statistically significant