Skip to main content

Table 3 Univariate and multivariate analyses in patients treated with allo-HSCT

From: MiR-425 expression profiling in acute myeloid leukemia might guide the treatment choice between allogeneic transplantation and chemotherapy

Variables

EFS

OS

HR (95% CI)

P-value

HR (95% CI)

P-value

Univariate analyses

 MiR-425 (high vs. low)

1.037 (0.624–1.724)

0.888

1.073 (0.626–1.840)

0.798

 WBC (≥ 20 vs. < 20 × 109/L)

1.530 (0.910–2.571)

0.108

0.949 (0.554–1.628)

0.851

 FLT3-ITD (positive vs. negative)

1.873 (1.020–3.437)

0.043

1.998 (1.053–3.788)

0.034

 NPM1 (mutated vs. wild)

0.913 (0.515–1.619)

0.755

0.879 (0.478–1.671)

0.678

 DNMT3A (mutated vs. wild)

1.106 (0.615–1.989)

0.737

1.269 (0.686–2.347)

0.447

 RUNX1 (mutated vs. wild)

1.375 (0.650–2.907)

0.404

2.253 (1.046–4.849)

0.038

 TP53 (mutated vs. wild)

1.579 (0.565–4.411)

0.383

3.788 (1.289–11.133)

0.015

 CEBPA (mutated vs. wild)

0.853 (0.366–1.989)

0.713

0.644 (0.256–1.620)

0.350

 IDHI/IDH2 (mutated vs. wild)

0.761 (0.417–1.389)

0.374

0.802 (0.422–1.524)

0.500

 NRAS/KRA S (mutated vs. wild)

1.373 (0.622–3.034)

0.433

0.658 (0.261–1.657)

0.374

 MLL-PTD (mutated vs. wild)

6.093 (2.051–18.098)

0.001

3.106 (1.104–8.741)

0.032

Multivariate analyses

 WBC (≥ 20 vs. < 20 × 109/L)

1.691 (0.973–2.940)

0.062

–

–

 FLT3-ITD (positive vs. negative)

1.740 (0.934–3.239)

0.081

2.549 (1.306–4.975)

0.006

 TP53 (mutated vs. wild)

2.657 (0.877–8.048)

0.084

5.841 (1.895–18.009)

0.002

 RUNX1 (mutated vs. wild)

–

–

3.007 (1.355–6.673)

0.007

 MLL-PTD (mutated vs. wild)

6.028 (2.001–18.158)

0.001

–

–

  1. EFS event-free survival, OS overall survival, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, WBC white blood cell, FLT3-ITD internal tandem duplication of the FLT3 gene, NPM1 nucleophosmin, DNMT3A DNA methyltransferase 3A, RUNX1 runt related transcription factor 1, MLL-PTD partial tandem duplication of the MLL gene, CEBPA CCAAT/enhancerbinding protein α, IDH isocitrate dehydrogenase
  2. Cox proportional hazards model was used for EFS and OS. HRs greater than 1.0 indicate higher and those less than 1.0 indicate lower risk for EFS or OS