Table 4

Univariate and Multivariate Cox-regression model

ER- (n = 186)

ER+ (n = 527)


HR (95% CI)

P

HR (95% CI)

P


LN

2.28 (1.36-3.85)

0.002

2.07 (1.47-2.90)

<10-4

LI

1.06 (0.66-1.70)

0.9

1.50 (0.72-3.14)

0.58

IRM

2.02 (1.19-3.41)

0.009

1.25 (0.91-1.71)

0.19

LNa + IRM

2.16 (1.28-3.64)

0.004

2.10 (1.49-2.96)

<10-4

LN + IRMa

1.93 (1.14-3.26)

0.015

1.29 (0.94-1.76)

0.11

LIa + IRM

0.86 (0.32-2.28)

0.76

1.75 (0.41-7.47)

0.45

LI + IRMa

2.05 (0.71-5.97)

0.19

0.57 (0.27-1.19)

0.13

LNa + LI + IRM

1.79 (0.70-4.62)

0.22

1.48 (0.68-3.19)

0.32

LN + LIa + IRM

0.84 (0.51-1.38)

0.72

1.65 (0.38-7.07)

0.5

LN + LI + IRMa

2.22 (0.76-6.50)

0.15

0.57 (0.27-1.20)

0.14


The table summarizes the hazard ratio (HR), 95% confidence interval (CI), and log-rank test P values of univariate Cox proportional hazards regression models, with lymph node status (LN = 1/0 for LN +/-), level of lymphocytic infiltration (LI = 1 for low infiltration score, and LI = 0 for high infiltration score) and the classification based on the seven-gene immune response related module (IRM; 2 = down-regulation of module, 1 = upregulation of module) as predictors. aCorresponding values in the multivariate Cox models including LN, LI, and IR module as predictors. The table compares the values for estrogen receptor (ER)- and ER+ breast cancer.

Teschendorff et al. Genome Biology 2007 8:R157   doi:10.1186/gb-2007-8-8-r157

Open Data