1547 / 1708
B
0.50 1.0 2.0 4.0 8.0 16.0 32.0
Hazard Ratio [EPN_PFA
v
EPN_PFB] for OS
All
GENE
CERN
St Jude’s
Burdenko
Univariate
Age adjusted
Multivariable
A
All
GENE
CERN
St Jude’s
Burdenko
Univariate
Age adjusted
Multivariable
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.0
8.0
Hazard Ratio [EPN_PFA
v
EPN_PFB] for PFS
Fig A2.
Forest plots of EPN_PFA versus EPN_PFB across all cohorts and each cohort individually as a univariate analysis, age-adjusted univariate analysis, and
multivariable analysis for (A) progression-free survival (PFS) and (B) overall survival (OS). CERN, Collaborative Ependymoma Research Network; GENE, Global Epen-
dymoma Network of Excellence.
A
Log relative hazard based on Cox
model: PFS
Log Relative Hazard
−3
−2
−1
0
1
2
0 10 20 30 40 50
PFB
PFA
Age (years)
B
Log relative hazard based on Cox
model: OS
Age (years)
Log Relative Hazard
−2
0
2
0 10 20 30 40 50
PFB
PFA
Fig A3.
Plot of age at diagnosis as a function of the log10 of the hazard ratios of EPN_PFA versus EPN_PFB for (A) progression-free survival (PFS) and (B) overall survival
(OS).
© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
J
OURNAL OF
C
LINICAL
O
NCOLOGY
Ramaswamy et al
from 139.18.224.1
Information downloaded from
jco.ascopubs.organd provided by at UNIVERSITAETSKLINIKUM LEIPZIG on June 20, 2016
Copyright © 2016 American S ciety of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.