©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Apr 15, 2020; 12(4): 405-423
Published online Apr 15, 2020. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v12.i4.405
Published online Apr 15, 2020. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v12.i4.405
Table 4 Overall survival sensitivity analyses
| Matched/weighted | HR (95%CI) of cetuximab vs bevacizumab, for LPTL | HR (95%CI) of cetuximab vs bevacizumab, for RPTL | |
| mOS (mo) for cetuximab vs bevacizumab | |||
| Main analysis with propensity score matching | 27.9 vs 25.4 | 0.87 (0.63-1.19) | 1.00 (0.68-1.46) |
| Planned sensitivity analyses | |||
| 1:1 matching without a caliper (propensity score matching) | 27.9 vs 21.7 | 0.76 (0.55-1.06) | 0.91 (0.59-1.41) |
| 2:1 matching without a caliper (propensity score matching) | 27.9 vs 22.3 | 0.82 (0.61-1.11) | 0.87 (0.58-1.29) |
| IPTW | 27.9 vs 25.6 | 0.87 (0.63-1.19) | 0.98 (0.65-1.49) |
| LPTL only (propensity score matching) | 29.4 vs 30.5 | 0.88 (0.61-1.28) | NA |
| RPTL only (propensity score matching) | 17.9 vs 20.4 | NA | 1.09 (0.74-1.63) |
| Change definition of tumor location (IPTW) | |||
| RPTL: C/A/HF; LPTL: transverse to rectum | 27.9 vs 25.6 | 0.89 (0.66-1.20) | 0.96 (0.61-1.53) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF to transverse; LPTL: splenic flexure to rectosigmoid | 27.9 vs 26.6 | 0.98 (0.66-1.44) | 0.98 (0.64-1.50) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF to transverse; LPTL: splenic flexure to descending/sigmoid | 27.4 vs 25.8 | 0.93 (0.61-1.43) | 0.98 (0.65-1.48) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF; LPTL: transverse to rectosigmoid | 27.9 vs 26.6 | 1.02 (0.71-1.46) | 0.95 (0.60-1.52) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF; LPTL: transverse to descending/sigmoid | 27.4 vs 25.8 | 0.98 (0.67-1.45) | 0.95 (0.60-1.50) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF; LPTL: splenic flexure to rectum | 28.3 vs 25.8 | 0.88 (0.64-1.21) | 0.96 (0.60-1.51) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF; LPTL: splenic flexure to rectosigmoid | 28.3 vs 26.6 | 1.00 (0.68-1.47) | 0.93 (0.59-1.48) |
| RPTL: C/A/HF; LPTL: splenic flexure to descending/sigmoid | 28.3 vs 26.0 | 0.95 (0.62-1.46) | 0.94 (0.60-1.47) |
| NRAS mutation–negative patients only (IPTW) | 28.9 vs 26.0 | 0.77 (0.40-1.50) | 1.03 (0.54-1.97) |
| Restricted to patients with chemotherapy backbone of FOLFIRI (IPTW) | 24.6 vs 23.1 | 0.96 (0.64-1.44) | 1.05 (0.62-1.77) |
| Restricted to patients with chemotherapy backbone of FOLFOX (IPTW) | Not reached vs 25.91 | 0.63 (0.37-1.08) | 0.52 (0.23-1.17) |
| Change definition of index date (propensity score matching)2 | 27.8 vs 24.8 | 0.86 (0.61-1.20) | 0.96 (0.64-1.44) |
| Restrict to stage IV patients (IPTW) | 29.7 vs 29.4 | 0.98 (0.61-1.57) | 0.99 (0.51-1.90) |
- Citation: Aggarwal H, Sheffield KM, Li L, Lenis D, Sorg R, Barzi A, Miksad R. Primary tumor location and survival in colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2020; 12(4): 405-423
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v12/i4/405.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v12.i4.405