Hazard ratios and p-values estimated for ΔFTV<sub>2</sub> in the full cohort.
Wei-Ching Lo
Wen Li
Ella F. Jones
David C. Newitt
John Kornak
Lisa J. Wilmes
Laura J. Esserman
Nola M. Hylton
10.1371/journal.pone.0142047.g001
https://plos.figshare.com/articles/figure/Hazard_ratios_and_p_values_estimated_for_FTV_sub_2_sub_in_the_full_cohort_/2356351
<p>(A) The heat map of estimated hazard ratios plotted with PE<sub>t</sub> in the y-axis from 30% to 200% and SER<sub>t</sub> in the x-axis from 0 to 2. Hazard ratios within the range of 0.9 to 1.2 were color-coded from blue to red. (B) The heat map of p-values, with estimated hazard ratios shown in (A), is shown in the range of 0.001 to 0.1 with color coded from red to blue. Note that values with high hazard ratios and low p-values are coded in red. On both maps, the default setting with PE<sub>t</sub> = 70% and SER<sub>t</sub> = 0 was marked as a circle, and the optimized setting at PE<sub>t</sub> = 120% and SER<sub>t</sub> = 1.4 was marked as a star. (C) A plot comparing the estimated hazard ratios and confident intervals at default (hazard ratio (H) of 1.0, 95% CI (0.9–1.1), <i>p</i> = 0.88) and optimized (hazard ratio (H) of 1.1, 95% CI (1.0–1.2), <i>p</i> = 8 × 10<sup>−4</sup>) settings.</p>
2016-02-17 12:06:57
treatment time points
breast cancer subtype
survival
PE t
MRI
SER t
HR
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response
Functional tumor volume
FTV
imaging
marker
HER 2 receptor expression
Breast Cancer Subtypes
breast cancer patients
DCE-MRI
epidermal growth factor receptor 2
Imaging Parameter Thresholds