Table 2.

Risks of composite end point of MBL levels

MBL SubgroupMBL Median (IQR), ng/mlHazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) and P Value
UnadjustedModel 1aModel 2bModel 3c
Sufficiency group1663 (745.8, 2630.8)1 (Reference)1 (Reference)1 (Reference)1 (Reference)
Deficiency group0.0 (0.0, 3.6)2.82 (1.43 to 5.57)2.85 (1.44 to 5.68)4.06 (1.99 to 8.30)5.18 (2.50 to 10.72)
 P value0.0030.003<0.001<0.001
High group4847.7 (4073.9, 5689.0)1.56 (1.06 to 2.30)1.52 (1.02 to 2.24)1.50 (1.00 to 2.27)1.54 (1.02 to 2.33)
 P value0.
  • Composite end point was defined as a 50% decline in eGFR or ESRD. IQR, interquartile range.

  • a Model 1 was adjusted for sex and age. Sex was analyzed as dichotomous data.

  • b Model 2 was adjusted for covariates in model 1 plus eGFR, proteinuria, high BP (yes or no), and Oxford M (mesangial hypercellularity), E (the presence of endocapillary proliferation), S (segmental glomerulosclerosis/adhesion), T (severity of tubular atrophy/interstitial fibrosis), and C (presence of crescent) scores. The latter five variables were analyzed as categorical data.

  • c Model 3 was adjusted for covariates in model 2 plus steroids or other immunosuppressive agents use (yes or no).