Basic Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 7, 2017; 23(13): 2318-2329
Published online Apr 7, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i13.2318
Table 1 Correlation between cullin 4A expression and clinicopathologic parameters of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma
ParameternCUL4A IHC scoreP value
Age (yr)0.902
< 65544.07 ± 2.46
≥ 65243.99 ± 2.47
Gender0.606
Male453.92 ± 2.34
Female334.21 ± 2.62
Tumour size (cm)0.330
< 3363.75 ± 2.55
≥ 3424.30 ± 2.36
Differentiation grade< 0.001
Well + moderate663.56 ± 2.30
Poor + undifferentiated126.68 ± 1.24
T stage0.001
T1 + T2633.62 ± 2.34
T3 + T4155.81 ± 2.12
N stage< 0.001
N0643.35 ± 2.08
N1 + N2147.21 ± 1.13
M stage0.980
M0764.04 ± 2.46
M124.00 ± 2.83
TNM stage< 0.001
I + II543.14 ± 2.03
III + IV246.08 ± 2.07
Table 2 Multivariate analysis of clinicopathologic features for overall survival and progression-free survival of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma patients
ParameterOverall survival
Progression-free survival
HR95%CIP valueHR95%CIP value
Univariate analysis
Age: ≥ 65 yr vs < 65 yr1.2180.676-2.1930.5121.0970.616-1.9540.753
Gender: male vs female1.0030.569-1.7670.9930.9310.538-1.6100.798
Differentiation: well + moderate vs poor + undifferentiated0.4320.171-1.0920.0760.4610.196-1.0830.075
Tumour size: ≥ 3 cm vs < 3 cm1.0490.598-1.8390.8691.0080.586-1.7330.977
T stage: (T3 + T4) vs (T1 + T2)2.1811.129-4.2130.0201.8710.977-3.5830.059
N stage: N1 + N2 vs N03.1201.613-6.0360.0012.9171.515-5.6190.001
M stage: M1 vs M04.7610.54-38.1700.1422.7660.363-21.0920.326
TNM stage: (III + IV) vs (I + II)3.0011.671-5.387< 0.0012.7291.538-4.8420.001
CUL4A: high vs low2.8231.577-5.053< 0.0012.9641.691-5.196< 0.001
Multivariate analysis
T stage: (T3 + T4) vs (T1 + T2)0.8110.271-2.4240.708---
N stage: N1 + N2 vs N00.9690.305-3.0810.9571.1060.428-2.8570.836
TNM stage: (III + IV) vs (I + II)2.4830.632-9.7520.1931.6990.735-3.9280.215
CUL4A: high vs low2.1171.086-4.1250.0282.2481.240-4.4460.009