Skip to main content
Insights into Imaging

Table 4 Uni- and multivariable hazard ratios for MRI-derived tumor size variables for predicting disease-specific survival in 416 patients with uterine cervical cancer (78 patients died from disease)

From: What MRI-based tumor size measurement is best for predicting long-term survival in uterine cervical cancer?

Variables

Univariable HR (95% CI)

p*

Multivariable HR (95% CI)a

p*

APimaging (cm)

1.76 (1.58–1.97)

 < 0.001

1.11 (0.78–1.58)

0.77

TVimaging (cm)

1.69 (1.53–1.87)

 < 0.001

1.14 (0.85–1.54)

0.77

SAGimaging (cm)

1.42 (1.33–1.51)

 < 0.001

0.82 (0.65–1.04)

0.28

MAXimaging (cm)

1.44 (1.35–1.53)

 < 0.001

1.51 (1.11–2.04)

0.03

Variables

Univariable HR (95% CI)

p*

Multivariable HR (95% CI)a

p*

MAXimaging (cm)

1.44 (1.35–1.53)

 < 0.001

1.27 (1.18–1.39)

 < 0.001

Age (decade)

1.69 (1.48–1.93)

 < 0.001

1.57 (1.34–1.85)

 < 0.001

FIGO (2018) stage (III/IV vs. I/II)

8.64 (5.36–13.93)

 < 0.001

3.24 (1.88–5.59)

 < 0.001

MAXimaging (cm) in FIGO (2018) subgroups

Univariable HR (95% CI)

p*

–

–

FIGO I (n = 260)

1.59 (1.15–2.20)

0.01

-

-

FIGO II (n = 50)

1.15 (0.83–1.61)

0.40

–

–

FIGO III (n = 81)

1.32 (1.16–1.51)

 < 0.001

–

–

FIGO IV (n = 25)

1.11 (0.97–1.28)

0.28

–

–

Subgroup analysis of surgically treated patients who had histopathological assessments of primary tumor (n = 261; 20 patients died from disease) with pelvic lymph node sampling (n = 200 patients; 17 patients died from disease)b

 

Univariable HR (95% CI)

p*

Multivariable HR (95% CI)c

p*

MAXimaging (cm)

1.77 (1.39–2.26)

 < 0.001

1.61 (1.25–2.08)

 < 0.001

Age (decade)

1.65 (1.21–2.24)

0.002

–

–

MAXhistology (cm)

1.49 (1.25–1.78)

 < 0.001

–

–

Inflammatory reaction (yes vs. no)

0.68 (0.23–2.04)

0.50

–

–

Microscopic depth of invasion (cm)

3.30 (1.40–7.79)

0.006

–

–

Vascular space invasion (yes vs. no)

5.73 (2.33–14.05)

 < 0.001

–

–

Histologic grade (high vs. low/medium)

5.67 (2.31–13.86)

 < 0.001

–

–

Lymph node metastasis (yes vs. no)

13.79 (5.70–33.41)

 < 0.001

4.54 (1.67–12.32)

 < 0.001

  1. APimaging, Anteroposterior tumor diameter at MRI; CI, confidence interval; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; HR, hazard ratio; MAXimaging, maximum tumor diameter at MRI; MAXhistology, maximum tumor diameter in histological samples; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; SAGimaging, sagittal tumor diameter at MRI; and TVimaging, transverse tumor diameter at MRI
  2. *Cox proportional hazards model; all p values corrected for multiple testing with Holm–Bonferroni method. Significant p values are given in boldface
  3. aIncludes all variables listed
  4. bMissing data were handled by multiple imputation in order to perform multivariable analysis on all patients treated with surgery
  5. cVariables in model were selected by using the “fastbw”-function in the “rms” r-package (1)
Back to article page