Table 2.

Cox proportional hazards regression analysis

UnivariateMultivariate
Hazard ratio95% CIPHazard ratio95% CIP
Combined PFS, n = 642, number of events = 311       
 Pre-BII — — — — 
 Im 0.45 0.26-0.76 .0032 0.48 0.28-0.83 00085 
 N 0.41 0.25-0.66 <.001 0.39 0.24-0.63 <.001 
 M 0.61 0.39-0.95 .027 0.58 0.37-0.92 .02 
 PC 0.28 0.13-0.6 <.001 0.3 0.14-0.64 .0018 
 4p16 — — — — 
 MAF 0.47 0.29-0.77 .0026 0.53 0.32-0.86 .011 
 6p21 0.23 0.07-0.73 .013 0.17 0.05-0.54 .0027 
 11q13 0.36 0.26-0.52 <.001 0.31 0.22-0.45 <.001 
 D1 0.35 0.26-0.47 <.001 0.3 0.22-0.41 <.001 
 D1plusD2 0.27 0.12-0.63 .0024 0.27 0.12-0.62 .0021 
 D2 0.38 0.25-0.57 <.001 0.25 0.16-0.39 <.001 
 Hovon65 — — — — 
 MyelomaIX 1.16 0.84-1.6 .38 1.15 0.83-1.59 .41 
 UAMS 0.37 0.29-0.48 <.001 0.33 0.26-0.42 <.001 
Combined OS, n = 642, number of events = 236 
 Pre-BII — — — — 
 Im 0.31 0.18-0.51 <.001 0.36 0.21-0.62 <.001 
 N 0.19 0.12-0.3 <.001 0.19 0.12-0.31 <.001 
 M 0.33 0.22-0.5 <.001 0.34 0.23-0.52 <.001 
 PC 0.1 0.03-0.28 <.001 0.11 0.04-0.32 <.001 
 4p16 — — — — 
 MAF 0.53 0.3-0.93 .027 0.59 0.34-1.05 .072 
 6p21 0.43 0.13-1.36 .15 0.51 0.16-1.65 .26 
 11q13 0.48 0.33-0.71 <.001 0.51 0.35-0.76 <.001 
 D1 0.37 0.26-0.51 <.001 0.39 0.28-0.55 <.001 
 D1plusD2 0.41 0.17-1.02 .056 0.31 0.12-0.78 .013 
 D2 0.53 0.34-0.83 .0056 0.47 0.3-0.75 .0014 
 Hovon65 — — — — 
 MyelomaIX 1.23 0.81-1.85 .33 1.24 0.82-1.88 .31 
 UAMS 0.91 0.68-1.21 .5 0.87 0.65-1.17 .35 
UnivariateMultivariate
Hazard ratio95% CIPHazard ratio95% CIP
Combined PFS, n = 642, number of events = 311       
 Pre-BII — — — — 
 Im 0.45 0.26-0.76 .0032 0.48 0.28-0.83 00085 
 N 0.41 0.25-0.66 <.001 0.39 0.24-0.63 <.001 
 M 0.61 0.39-0.95 .027 0.58 0.37-0.92 .02 
 PC 0.28 0.13-0.6 <.001 0.3 0.14-0.64 .0018 
 4p16 — — — — 
 MAF 0.47 0.29-0.77 .0026 0.53 0.32-0.86 .011 
 6p21 0.23 0.07-0.73 .013 0.17 0.05-0.54 .0027 
 11q13 0.36 0.26-0.52 <.001 0.31 0.22-0.45 <.001 
 D1 0.35 0.26-0.47 <.001 0.3 0.22-0.41 <.001 
 D1plusD2 0.27 0.12-0.63 .0024 0.27 0.12-0.62 .0021 
 D2 0.38 0.25-0.57 <.001 0.25 0.16-0.39 <.001 
 Hovon65 — — — — 
 MyelomaIX 1.16 0.84-1.6 .38 1.15 0.83-1.59 .41 
 UAMS 0.37 0.29-0.48 <.001 0.33 0.26-0.42 <.001 
Combined OS, n = 642, number of events = 236 
 Pre-BII — — — — 
 Im 0.31 0.18-0.51 <.001 0.36 0.21-0.62 <.001 
 N 0.19 0.12-0.3 <.001 0.19 0.12-0.31 <.001 
 M 0.33 0.22-0.5 <.001 0.34 0.23-0.52 <.001 
 PC 0.1 0.03-0.28 <.001 0.11 0.04-0.32 <.001 
 4p16 — — — — 
 MAF 0.53 0.3-0.93 .027 0.59 0.34-1.05 .072 
 6p21 0.43 0.13-1.36 .15 0.51 0.16-1.65 .26 
 11q13 0.48 0.33-0.71 <.001 0.51 0.35-0.76 <.001 
 D1 0.37 0.26-0.51 <.001 0.39 0.28-0.55 <.001 
 D1plusD2 0.41 0.17-1.02 .056 0.31 0.12-0.78 .013 
 D2 0.53 0.34-0.83 .0056 0.47 0.3-0.75 .0014 
 Hovon65 — — — — 
 MyelomaIX 1.23 0.81-1.85 .33 1.24 0.82-1.88 .31 
 UAMS 0.91 0.68-1.21 .5 0.87 0.65-1.17 .35 

Cox proportional hazards regression analysis in the meta–data set for BAGS subtypes based on PFS and OS, demonstrating added independent significance to the TC classification staging system. Columns on the left show results for a univariate analysis with each of the covariates, whereas columns on the right show results from the multivariate model. The Pre-BI class was dropped from the analysis because of too few observations in this group.

CI, confidence interval.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal