Table 2 Univariate and multivariate Cox’s proportional hazard regression models to predict pentafecta achievement.

From: Comparing pentafecta outcomes between nerve sparing and non nerve sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a propensity score-matched study

Variable

Univariate

Multivariate

OR (95%CI)

p-value

OR (95%CI)

p-value

Nerve-sparing

No

Ref

 

Ref

 

Yes

5.9 (3.65,9.54)

 < 0.001

4.16 (2.51,6.9)

 < 0.001

Nerve-sparing technique

 None

Ref

 < 0.001

Ref

 < 0.001

 Unilateral

4.89 (3.7,7.96)

 < 0.001

3.83 (2.31,6.37)

 < 0.001

 Bilateral

11.93 (6.93,20.55)

 < 0.001

7.43 (4.14,13.36)

 < 0.001

Age group

 > = 65

Ref

   

 < 65

2.22 (1.69,2.92)

 < 0.001

1.25 (0.91,1.71)

0.166

PSA at diagnosis

 > = 20

Ref

 

Ref

 

 10–19.99

1.91 (0.84,4.37)

0.125

1.12 (0.45,2.8)

0.802

 < 10

3.0 (0.84,6.56)

0.006

1.43 (0.6,3.4)

0.417

Gleason score

 8–10

Ref

 

Ref

 

 7

1.25 (0.86,1.82)

0.238

1.01 (0.66,1.53)

0.966

 6

2.91 (1.81,4.69)

 < 0.001

1.86 (1.08,3.22)

0.026

Clinical T stage

 3–4

Ref

 

Ref

 

 2c

3.02 (1.15,7.93)

0.025

2.51 (0.84,7.5)

0.099

 1-2b

4.43 (1.79,10.99)

0.001

1.73 (0.6,4.99)

0.307

D’Amico classification

 High

Ref

 

Ref

 

 Intermediate

1.4 (1.03,1.91)

0.03

0.69 (0.46,1.03)

0.071

 Low

2.36 (1.6,3.48)

 < 0.001

0.73 (0.42,1.24)

0.245

Neoadjuvant treatment

 None

Ref

 

Ref

 

 ADT

0.78 (0.49,1.24)

0.296

1.67 (0.94,2.98)

0.082

 Anti-A

0.55 (0.33,0.92)

0.022

0.64 (0.36,1.15)

0.139

 NACHT

0.48 (0.3,0.76)

0.002

1.16 (0.64,2.13)

0.623

Prostate volume (cm3)

 < 35

Ref

0.569

  

 > = 35

0.89 (0.6,1.33)

   
Back to article page