Table 1.
Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for DFS
FactorCox model
HR95% CIP value
Age, per increase of 1 yr 0.71 0.43–1.34 0.127 
Sex, men vs. women 1.01 0.93–1.28 0.414 
CLM number, per increase of 1 unit 0.71 0.51–0.81 0.312 
CLM size, per increase of 1 cm 1.18 0.81–1.21 0.063 
Preoperative chemotherapy, yes vs. no 0.98 0.31–1.32 0.849 
CEA level, elevated vs. normal 1.14 0.73–1.35 0.073 
CA19-9 level, elevated vs. normal 1.31 1.58–2.61 0.061 
T of the primary tumor, T3-4 vs. T1-T2 0.31 0.12–0.99 0.789 
N of the primary tumor, positive vs. negative 1.01 0.49–1.29 0.071 
Synchronous vs. metachronous presentation 0.88 0.76–2.11 0.061 
Grading of primary tumor, G1-2 vs. G3-4 1.19 0.18–1.81 0.097 
RAS status, mutated vs. wild-type 0.98 0.19–1.31 0.739 
Liver involvement, bilateral vs. unilateral 1.01 0.67–1.14 0.076 
Site of the primary tumor, right vs. left 0.79 0.51–1.56 0.364 
TAMs area, L-TAM vs. S-TAM 3.41 1.13–5.43 0.001 
FactorCox model
HR95% CIP value
Age, per increase of 1 yr 0.71 0.43–1.34 0.127 
Sex, men vs. women 1.01 0.93–1.28 0.414 
CLM number, per increase of 1 unit 0.71 0.51–0.81 0.312 
CLM size, per increase of 1 cm 1.18 0.81–1.21 0.063 
Preoperative chemotherapy, yes vs. no 0.98 0.31–1.32 0.849 
CEA level, elevated vs. normal 1.14 0.73–1.35 0.073 
CA19-9 level, elevated vs. normal 1.31 1.58–2.61 0.061 
T of the primary tumor, T3-4 vs. T1-T2 0.31 0.12–0.99 0.789 
N of the primary tumor, positive vs. negative 1.01 0.49–1.29 0.071 
Synchronous vs. metachronous presentation 0.88 0.76–2.11 0.061 
Grading of primary tumor, G1-2 vs. G3-4 1.19 0.18–1.81 0.097 
RAS status, mutated vs. wild-type 0.98 0.19–1.31 0.739 
Liver involvement, bilateral vs. unilateral 1.01 0.67–1.14 0.076 
Site of the primary tumor, right vs. left 0.79 0.51–1.56 0.364 
TAMs area, L-TAM vs. S-TAM 3.41 1.13–5.43 0.001 

CA 19-9, cancer antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; T, tumor, N, node; RAS, RAS gene.

View Large
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal