Skip to main content

Table 4 Univariate and multivariate analyses of overall survival in patients with cytogenetically normal AML, for the LSC- DNM gene-sets

From: Systematic computation with functional gene-sets among leukemic and hematopoietic stem cells reveals a favorable prognostic signature for acute myeloid leukemia

Dataset

Variate model

Variates

HR

95% CI

p-value

GSE12417 (n = 242)

Univariate model

3 DNM fGSs vs. 4 control fGSs

0.53

0.35-0.79

0.0014**

Age group, years (≥60 vs. <60)

1.63

1.18-2.26

0.0029**

Multivariate model

3 DNM fGSs vs. 4 control fGSs

0.6

0.37-0.83

0.0038**

Age group, years (≥60 vs. <60)

1.6

1.12-2.15

0.0083**

GSE14468 (n = 214)

Univariate model

3 DNM fGSs v.s 4 control fGSs

0.5

0.33-0.77

0.0012**

KRAS mutaion vs. others

70.2

7.30-674.5

8.60E-13***

ELN_risk (IntermediateI vs. Favorable)

1.8

1.27-2.62

0.00095***

Age group, years (≥60 vs. <60)

1.4

0.89-2.18

0.15

NPM1 mutation vs. others

0.8

0.57-1.12

0.19

CEBPA mutation vs. others

0.7

0.42-1.22

0.22

Gender

0.9

0.62-1.21

0.39

BM Blast (>50 vs. <=50)

1.1

0.76-1.53

0.68

NRAS mutation vs. others

1.0

0.60-1.81

0.90

Multivariate model

3 DNM fGSs v.s 4 control fGSs

0.5

0.35-0.83

0.0047**

KRAS mutaion vs. others

90.7

9.27-888.79

0.00011***

ELN_risk (IntermediateI vs. Favorable)

1.7

1.19-2.48

0.0039**

TCGA (n = 91)

Univariate model

3 DNM fGSs vs. 4 control fGSs

0.4

0.19-0.67

8.23E-04***

Age group, years (≥60 vs. <60)

2.5

1.58-4.09

6.53E-05***

BM Blast (>50 vs. <=50)

0.6

0.33-1.09

0.09.

Gender

0.7

0.46-1.16

0.18

Multivariate model

3 DNM fGSs vs. 4 control fGSs

0.4

0.23-0.84

0.012*

Age group, years (≥60 vs. <60)

2.1

1.32-3.47

0.0022**

  1. Significance code: ‘.’:p < .1; ‘*’: p < .05; ‘**’p < .01; ‘***’p < .001.
  2. Significant univariate tested factors (p < .05) are used for multivariate test. Boldface highlights the results of DMN fGSs.