Figures & data
Figure 1. (a) Time to local failure, all patients, log-rank p = 0.02. The primary difference between the two arms occurred at the beginning of the study, corresponding to a significant difference in the complete remission rates in the two arms. (b) Overall survival, all patients, log-rank p = 0.84. (c) Hazard function of time to local failure by arm, all patients, log-rank p = 0.02. Hazard means the risk of having a local failure. Note that the primary difference in the hazard functions between the two arms seemed to have occurred within the first 6 months, likely due to the difference in the complete remission rates in the two arms. The competing risks, including death, were assumed to be independent of this outcome in the two arms. HT, hyperthermia. Figure reproduced from Jones et al., J Clin Oncol 23:3079–3085, 2005 Citation[19], with permission.
![Figure 1. (a) Time to local failure, all patients, log-rank p = 0.02. The primary difference between the two arms occurred at the beginning of the study, corresponding to a significant difference in the complete remission rates in the two arms. (b) Overall survival, all patients, log-rank p = 0.84. (c) Hazard function of time to local failure by arm, all patients, log-rank p = 0.02. Hazard means the risk of having a local failure. Note that the primary difference in the hazard functions between the two arms seemed to have occurred within the first 6 months, likely due to the difference in the complete remission rates in the two arms. The competing risks, including death, were assumed to be independent of this outcome in the two arms. HT, hyperthermia. Figure reproduced from Jones et al., J Clin Oncol 23:3079–3085, 2005 Citation[19], with permission.](/cms/asset/caad9c57-dbf1-4bde-a074-3db785b9745f/ihyt_a_176464_f0001_b.gif)
Figure 2. Estimated survival distribution functions of time to local failure for a ‘typical’ dog in the low and high thermal dose groups from the Cox proportional hazards model. There is a significant association between thermal dose group and time to local failure after controlling for total duration of heating, tumour volume and tumour grade (hazard ratio of low vs high, 2.28; 95% CI 1.12–4.64; p = 0.023). Duration of heating and tumour volume values used in the estimation of survival functions were median values for the respective group and overall, respectively. Htmin, total duration of heat treatment; median duration of heating in the thermal dose group was used in the plot. Stumvol, median tumour volume over all dogs in trial. Figure adapted from Thrall et al., Clin Cancer Res 11:5206–5214, 2005 Citation[20].
![Figure 2. Estimated survival distribution functions of time to local failure for a ‘typical’ dog in the low and high thermal dose groups from the Cox proportional hazards model. There is a significant association between thermal dose group and time to local failure after controlling for total duration of heating, tumour volume and tumour grade (hazard ratio of low vs high, 2.28; 95% CI 1.12–4.64; p = 0.023). Duration of heating and tumour volume values used in the estimation of survival functions were median values for the respective group and overall, respectively. Htmin, total duration of heat treatment; median duration of heating in the thermal dose group was used in the plot. Stumvol, median tumour volume over all dogs in trial. Figure adapted from Thrall et al., Clin Cancer Res 11:5206–5214, 2005 Citation[20].](/cms/asset/57c0b0d4-e9ec-45be-95af-4cb340866696/ihyt_a_176464_f0002_b.gif)