Skip to main content

Table 5 Univariate Cox regression analysis of the impact of lncRNA signature and other clinicopathological features on DFS in the three NSCLC patient cohorts

From: Identification of a 4-lncRNA signature predicting prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study in China

Parameters Training group Validation group Independent group
Hazard ratio (95% CI) P value Hazard ratio (95% CI) P value Hazard ratio (95% CI) P value
Signature
 (High vs low) 2.61 (1.50–4.56) < 0.001 3.21 (1.80–5.71) < 0.001 2.18 (1.10–4.34) 0.025
Age
 (≥ 60 vs < 60) 1.30 (0.76–2.21) 0.330 1.30 (0.76–2.21) 0.510 1.19 (0.60–2.35) 0.599
Gender
 (Male vs female) 0.57 (0.33–1.00) 0.050 0.97 (0.53–1.78) 0.945 0.77 (0.37–1.60) 0.496
TNM stages
 (III vs II vs I) 1.55 (1.18–2.04) 0.001 1.70 (1.29–2.25) < 0.001 1.46 (1.00–2.12) 0.045
Histological type
 (ADC vs SCC) 0.83 (0.44–1.59) 0.589 1.48 (0.88–2.49) 0.133 1.02 (0.45–2.29) 0.954
Tumor size
 (≥ 5 cm vs < 5 cm) 1.89 (1.12–3.22) 0.017 1.57 (0.94–2.61) 0.082 1.92 (0.92–4.03) 0.081
Differentiation
 (Poor vs well/moderate) 0.62 (0.36–1.05) 0.079 1.22 (0.73–2.04) 0.427 1.29 (0.65–2.57) 0.453
Lymph metastasis
 (Yes vs no) 1.82 (1.07–3.10) 0.025 1.72 (1.01–2.91) 0.042 2.13 (0.87–5.23) 0.095
Smoking history
 (Yes vs no) 0.54 (0.32–0.92) 0.024 1.15 (0.68–1.95) 0.586 1.00 (0.51–1.97) 0.989
Fam. cancer hist.
 (Yes vs no) 0.80 (0.38–1.71) 0.580 0.69 (0.31–1.53) 0.369 1.23 (0.16–9.12) 0.834
  1. Italic P values represent the statistic significance
  2. Fam. cancer hist. Family cancer history