Table 3.

Cox regression analyses based on 281 patients

Univariate analysisMultivariate analysisa
FactorPHR (95% CI)PHR (95% CI)
PFS
 Lymph node status<0.0012.29 (1.45–3.61)N.S.
 Tumor volumeb<0.0013.47 (2.05–5.87)0.0042.26 (1.30–3.95)
 FIGO stagec<0.0014.12 (2.63–6.47)<0.0013.19 (1.95–5.21)
 6-gene hypoxia classifierd<0.0012.46 (1.57–3.85)0.0022.12 (1.33–3.40)
LRCe
 Lymph node status0.0043.07 (1.44–6.57)(0.056)2.16 (0.98–4.73)
 Tumor volumeb0.0152.67 (1.21–5.91)N.S.
 FIGO stagec0.0013.21 (1.56–6.59)0.0072.85 (1.34–6.07)
 6-gene hypoxia classifierd0.0023.23 (1.56–6.72)0.0122.62 (1.23–5.58)
DSS
 Lymph node status<0.0012.60 (1.55–4.36)(0.095)1.62 (0.92–2.84)
 Tumor volumeb<0.0014.11 (2.21–7.65)0.0212.21 (1.13–4.34)
 FIGO stagec<0.0015.01 (3.02–8.31)<0.0013.58 (2.03–6.23)
 6-gene hypoxia classifierd<0.0012.70 (1.63–4.46)0.0062.12 (1.24–3.61)
  • Abbreviation: N.S., non-significant.

  • aIn the multivariate analyses, the same results were obtained for forward and backward selection.

  • bPatients were divided into two groups based on the median tumor volume of 36.8 cm3. Tumor volume was undetermined for 17 patients.

  • cPatients were divided into two groups based on a FIGO stage of IB–IIB and IIIA–IVA.

  • dPatients were classified into two groups, one group with less hypoxic tumors and one with more hypoxic tumors.

  • eLocation of recurrence was unknown for 3 patients.