Skip to main content

Table 4 Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses of OS

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

1.02 (0.99–1.04) per score

0.19

  

Sex

Male

Reference

0.43

  

Female

0.78 (0.41–1.39)

   

ECOG PS

0

Reference

0.011*

Reference

0.0074*

 ≥ 1

1.93 (1.15–3.18)

 

2.09 (1.20–3.57)

 

eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2)

 < 60

Reference

0.52

  

 ≥ 60

1.17 (0.71–1.92)

   

Primary site

Bladder

Reference

0.17

  

Upper urinary tract

1.06 (0.63–1.82)

   

Both

1.85 (0.91–3.57)

   

Resection of primary site

No

Reference

0.0043*

Reference

0.079

Yes

0.49 (0.30–0.80)

 

0.64 (0.38–1.05)

 

Prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy

No

Reference

0.61

  

Yes

1.20 (0.55–2.31)

   

Lymph node metastasis

No

Reference

0.038*

Reference

0.0032*

Yes

1.73 (1.05–2.95)

 

2.28 (1.34–4.01)

 

Lung metastasis

No

Reference

0.62

  

Yes

0.88 (0.53–1.44)

   

Bone metastasis

No

Reference

0.71

  

Yes

1.13 (0.56–2.84)

   

Liver metastasis

No

Reference

0.014*

Reference

0.0029*

Yes

2.20 (1.12–3.96)

 

2.72 (1.35–5.09)

 

First-line regimens

Full-dose GC

Reference

0.73

  

Dose-reduced GC

1.11 (0.59–2.03)

   

GCa

1.25 (0.72–2.18)

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