Case Control Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Mar 6, 2020; 8(5): 874-886
Published online Mar 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i5.874
Table 1 Primer sequence
R (5’-3’)F (5’-3’)
GDF11GTCATTAGCATGGCCCAGGAGGCCTTCAGTACCTTTGTGAACATC
PD-1GCACCGTCAAGGCTGAGAACCCGCTAGGAAAGACAATGGTG
GAPDHGCACCGTCAAGGCTGAGAACTGGTGAAGACGCCAGTGGA
Table 2 Comparison of general data in the two groups, n (%)
Research group (n = 89)Control group (n = 95)χ2 or tP value
Age (yr)0.8880.376
49.2 ± 8.650.3 ± 8.2
BMI (kg/cm2)0.9630.337
23.62 ± 3.5224.16 ± 4.05
Disease course (mo)0.1740.862
7.62 ± 4.167.51 ± 4.38
Gender0.8700.351
Male62 (69.66)60 (63.16)
Female27 (30.34)35 (36.84)
Smoking0.0950.758
Yes60 (65.26)62 (65.26)
No29 (32.58)33 (34.74)
Drinking0.6840.408
Yes55 (61.80)53 (55.79)
No34 (38.20)42 (44.21)
Preference for betel nut0.2840.594
Yes65 (73.03)66 (69.47)
No24 (26.97)29 (30.53)
Dietary preference0.4320.511
Spicy52 (58.43)60 (63.16)
Light37 (41.57)35 (36.84)
Exercise habits0.3820.537
Yes12 (13.48)10 (10.53)
No77 (86.52)85 (89.47)
Tissue type0.4860.975
Squamous cell carcinoma38 (42.70)38 (40.00)
Malignant lymphoma16 (17.98)15 (15.79)
Mucoepidermoid carcinoma18 (20.22)22 (23.16)
Adenoid cystic carcinoma10 (11.24)12 (12.63)
Adenocarcinoma7(7.87)8 (8.42)
Pathological staging0.3540.552
I-II16 (17.98)14 (14.74)
III-IV73 (82.02)81 (85.26)
Metastasis0.0000.991
Yes75 (84.27)80 (84.21)
No14 (15.73)15 (15.79)
Degree of differentiation0.3680.051
Poorly differentiated79 (88.76)80 (84.21)
Moderately and highly differentiated10 (11.24)15 (15.79)
Nationality0.8120.368
Han85 (95.51)89 (93.68)
Ethnic minorities4 (4.49)6 (6.32)
Living environment0.3670.545
Cities and towns62 (69.66)70 (73.68)
Countryside27 (30.34)25 (26.32)
Table 3 Comparison of efficacy between the two groups, n (%)
Research group (n = 89)Control group (n = 95)χ2P value
CR33 (37.08)20 (21.05)
PR35 (39.33)38 (40.00)
NC15 (16.85)22 (23.16)
PD6 (6.74)15 (15.79)
Cure rate (%)5.0170.025
76.4061.05
Table 4 Comparison of adverse reactions between the two groups, n (%)
Research group (n = 89)Control group (n = 95)χ2P value
Spinal cord injury0 (0.00)3 (3.16)
Laryngeal edema1 (1.12)7 (7.37)
Vascular embolism0 (0.00)4 (4.21)
Pain in operation area0 (0.00)9 (9.47)
Radiation skin injury (Total)20 (26.97)0 (0.00)
Degree 065 (73.03)-
Degree I14 (15.73)-
Degree II9 (10.11)-
Degree III1 (1.12)-
Degree IV0 (0.00)-
Total incidence rate (%)0.0100.922
23.6024.21
Table 5 Comparison of recurrence between the two groups, n (%)
Research group (n = 89)Control group (n = 95)χ2P value
Recurrence5.4060.020
Yes13 (13.48)26 (27.37)
No77 (86.52)69 (72.63)
Table 6 Predictive value of growth differentiation factor 11 and programmed death receptor-1 for efficacy
GDF11PD-1GDF11 + PD-1
AUC0.7040.7290.848
Std. Error0.0400.0390.028
95%CI0.624-0.7830.652-0.8060.793-0.902
Cut-off2.6051.5650.314
Sensitivity (%)63.7953.4596.55
Specificity (%)69.9283.7467.48
P< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001
Table 7 Predictive value of growth differentiation factor 11 and programmed death receptor-1 for recurrence after treatment
GDF11PD-1GDF11 + PD-1
AUC0.7720.7500.881
Std. Error0.0400.0450.036
95%CI0.694-0.8500.662-08360.810-0.952
Cut-off1.6551.1250.310
Sensitivity (%)92.4661.5482.05
Specificity (%)46.4877.4688.73
P value< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001