Skip to main content

Table 3 Efficacy analysis of time to progression and overall survival by unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models

From: Hormonal therapy might be a better choice as maintenance treatment than capecitabine after response to first-line capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy for patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer

Variable TTP OS
HT vs. MCT HT vs. MCT
Median (months) 13 vs. 8 43 vs. 37
HR by unadjusted Cox regression 0.64 0.82
 95% CI 0.44–0.91 0.50–1.32
 Log-rank P value 0.011 0.400
HR by adjusteda Cox regression 0.65 0.83
 95% CI 0.43–0.93 0.49–1.37
 P value 0.018 0.450
  1. HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, HT hormonal therapy, MCT maintenance capecitabine monotherapy
  2. aAdjusted to menopausal status, Karnofsky performance status, number of metastasis sites, interval of disease-free survival, visceral disease, and response to FCCT, which were all predefined in the study protocol