Skip to main content

Table 8 Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression on suspected acute exacerbation in the subsequent period

From: Change in forced vital capacity and associated subsequent outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

 

Suspected Acute Exacerbationa

 

Hazard Ratio (95 % CI)

P-value*

Race

 White vs. non-white

0.63 (0.45–0.88)

0.007*

Lung-function decline group

 Marginal decline vs. stable

2.02 (1.13–3.59)

0.011*

 Significant decline vs. stable

2.86 (1.69–4.85)

<0.001*

BMI

 25–30 vs. <25

0.82 (0.53–1.26)

0.362

 ≥30 vs. <25

0.75 (0.45–1.23)

0.245

Comorbidities

 Cardiac disorder vs. no cardiac disorder

1.57 (1.04–2.37)

0.031*

 Pulmonary hypertension vs. no pulmonary hypertension

1.65 (1.03–2.63)

0.036*

 Emphysema vs. no emphysema

1.89 (1.02–3.50)

0.043*

 Gastroesophageal reflux disease vs. no gastroesophageal reflux disease

1.07 (0.74–1.54)

0.736

Smoking status

 History of smoking vs. no history of smoking

0.91 (0.64–1.31)

0.608

Suspected AEx in the concurrent period

 Yes vs. no

2.98 (1.92–4.62)

<0.001*

Use of prednisone and azathioprine in the concurrent period

 Both vs. neither

1.40 (0.76–2.55)

0.276

 Prednisone only vs. neither

1.23 (0.81–1.87)

0.335

 Azathioprine only vs. neither

0.99 (0.32–3.05)

0.980

Symptoms at initial IPF diagnosis

 Dyspnea vs. no dyspnea

1.39 (0.68–2.83)

0.368

 Weight loss vs. no weight loss

1.16 (0.66–2.05)

0.595

Physician's main practice setting

 Academic vs. non-academic

1.02 (0.69–1.51)

0.910

GAP index (per unit increase)b

1.07 (0.94–1.22)

0.301

  1. aMultivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the hazard ratio, 95 % confidence interval and p-value, accounting for physician clustering using generalized estimating equations
  2. bThe hazard ratio for the GAP index was estimated for every one point increase in GAP index
  3. *P-values less than 0.05 are indicated with an asterisk (*)