op_type anatomic n
major anatomic 7
minor anatomic 34
minor nonanatomic 11
cirrhosis op_type n
no major 5
no minor 13
yes major 2
yes minor 32

Univariate

Cirrhotic vs non-cirrhotic

Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: blood_loss by cirrhosis
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
204.5 0.05049 two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: tumor_number by cirrhosis
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
191 0.008711 * * two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: margin by cirrhosis
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
211 0.06739 two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: optime by cirrhosis
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
220.5 0.09522 two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: los by cirrhosis
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
313.5 0.8914 two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: afp by cirrhosis
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
205 0.09487 two.sided

Univariate

Major/minor/anatomic

Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: blood_loss by op_type
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
192 0.3588 two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: blood_loss by anatomic
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
208 0.7014 two.sided
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction: blood_loss by anatomic
Test statistic P value Alternative hypothesis
165 0.5675 two.sided

Survival

Median follow-up (reverse KM method): 41 months

Median OS(cohort): 89.3 months

Five year overall survival non-cirrhotic vs cirrhotic: 41% vs 34%

Cox

Fitting Proportional Hazards Regression Model: Surv(days_fu, dead) ~ tumor_number * (vascular_invasion + lymphatic_invasion)
  coef exp(coef) se(coef) z p
tumor_number -0.6912 0.501 1.05 -0.6581 0.5104
vascular_invasionYes -2.54 0.07889 1.716 -1.48 0.139
lymphatic_invasionYes 5.915 370.7 2.291 2.582 0.009813
tumor_number:vascular_invasionYes 2.397 10.99 1.197 2.002 0.04526
tumor_number:lymphatic_invasionYes -2.798 0.06096 1.441 -1.942 0.05214

Likelihood ratio test=20.36 on 5 df, p=0.001067222 n= 52, number of events= 17

tumor_number vascular_invasion lymphatic_invasion rr
11 1 Yes No 0.69
12 2 Yes No 3.78
13 3 Yes No 20.82
14 4 Yes No 114.63
15 5 Yes No 631.27

Interpretting the Cox model is a little challenging due to the interactions between vascular invasion, lymphatic invasion and tumour number. Perhaps the easiest thing to do is just ignore lymphatic invasion and focus on tumour number and vascular invasion. As you can see with rows 11-16(tumor number 1-5, vascular invasion “yes”), increasing tumour number in the presence of vascular invasion is a very strong risk factor (the relative risk is next to it). The relative risk is compared with the sample “average” of tumour number (1.5).