TABLE 3

FROM:

Expression of Smad2 and Smad4 in cervical cancer: absent nuclear Smad4 expression correlates with poor survival

Judith N Kloth, Gemma G Kenter, H Siebe Spijker, Sandra Uljee, Willem E Corver, Ekaterina S Jordanova, Gert Jan Fleuren and Arko Gorter

Table 3. Prognostic value of weak cytoplasmic Smad4 and absent nuclear Smad4

Parameter	Limits	DFS			Overall survival
		HR	95% CI	P	HR	95% CI	P
Univariate Cox analysis
Lymph nodes	Positive vs negative	7.16	3.16–16.25	0.001	5.69	2.53–12.82	0.001
Infiltration depth	<15 vs 15 mm	3.64	1.57–8.44	0.003	3.96	1.64–9.55	0.002
Tumor size	<40 vs 40 mm	4.24	1.79–10.03	0.001	7.90	2.92–21.37	0.001
Vaso-invasion	Positive vs negative	3.41	1.51–7.70	0.003	2.76	1.24–6.17	0.013
Smad4 cytoplasmic	Weak vs moderate/strong	3.23	1.41–7.38	0.006	3.45	1.44–8.23	0.005
Smad4 nuclear	Absent vs present	3.15	1.25–7.96	0.015	3.61	1.48–8.88	0.005
Multivariate Cox analysis
Lymph nodes	Positive vs negative	4.00	1.40–11.45	0.010	4.40	1.55–12.51	0.006
Tumor size	<40 vs 40 mm	2.37	0.91–6.15	0.078	5.31	1.88–14.98	0.002
Vaso-invasion	Positive vs negative	1.50	0.59–3.81	0.399	0.65	0.54–3.37	0.520
Infiltration depth	<15 vs 15 mm	1.80	0.59–5.53	0.305	4.15	0.64–5.32	0.273
Smad4 nuclear	Absent vs present	2.91	1.08–7.89	0.035	2.74	1.07–6.78	0.035

 CI, confidence interval; DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio.

 Bold values were considered statistically significant.