Table 5– Paired comparisons
ClassificationGroup I versus IIGroup II versus IIIGroup III versus IVGroup IV versus V
All patients
 Albain et al. [5]1.93 (1.39–2.64)1.21 (0.90–1.66)1.88 (1.53–2.31)
 Sagman et al. [6]1.47 (1.00–2.11)1.73 (1.23–2.51)1.67 (1.29–2.15)
 Paesmans et al. [4]2.24 (1.77–2.87)1.74 (1.39–2.18)1.33 (1.00–1.77)
 Sculier et al. [2]2.17 (1.57–2.96)1.13 (0.84–1.53)1.77 (1.45–2.15)
Patients with extensive disease
 Albain et al. [5]1.88 (1.53–2.31)
 Sagman et al. [6]1.70 (1.30–2.18)
 Paesmans et al. [4]1.52 (1.20–1.92)1.33 (1.00–1.77)
 Sculier et al. [2]1.77 (1.45–2.15)
 Foster et al. [7]1.18 (0.79–1.69)1.04 (0.71–1.57)1.59 (1.15–2.17)
  • Data are presented as hazard ratios (95% CI).