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