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 (*)