676 Characteristic Event Age Initial PSA Baseline hemoglobin Gleason score 6  7 8 9 10 Bone metastasis (EOD) 0  1 2 3 4 No LN metastasis Regional LN metastasis Non regional LN metastasis TABLE 2. Effects of multiple variables on the response to hormonal therapy and the response to chemotherapy Response to hormonal therapy Response to chemotherapy OR (95% CI) p-valuea OR (95% CI) p-valueb 2.161 (0.355–13.154) 3.724 (0.752–18.438) 33.789 (4.356–262.129) 5.642 (0.942–33.795) 40 - - - - - - - - - 0.695 0.200 0.751 0.013 0.403 0.107 0.001 0.058 0.321 0.207 0.139 0.999 0.342 0.243 0.879 0.221 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; EOD, extent of disease; LN, lymph node. a,b:Effects of variables were examined by analysis of variance (multivariate logistic regression with the backward stepwise method). Cho et al 0.159 0.849 0.665 0.620 0.204 0.977 0.626 0.270 0.470 0.723 0.314 0.329 0.507 0.550 0.666 0.276 FIG. 2. Differences in progression-free time to castration-resis- tant prostate cancer between lymph node metastasis groups (Kaplan-Meier method, p=0.393, 0.307, respectively). LN, lymph node. fidence interval [CI], 4.356 to 262.129; p=0.001, Gleason score 10: OR, 5.642; 95% CI, 0.942 to 33.795; p=0.058) (Table 2), there was no statistical difference between hor- monal therapy response and the site of lymph node meta- stasis (p=0.879 and 0.221, respectively; Table 2). The second evaluation performed in step 1 was “progre- ssion-free interval to CRPC.” The progression-free time to CRPC was not significantly reduced with lymph node metastasis burden by Kaplan-Meier analysis (p=0.393 and 0.307, respectively) (Fig. 2). Patient age, Gleason score, ini- tial PSA level, and baseline hemoglobin level were not sig- Korean J Urol 2012;53:673-679 nificant predictors of progression-free time to CRPC. However, regional lymph node metastasis and NRLN metastasis were significant predictive factors for pro- gression-free time to CRPC (regional lymph node meta- stasis: hazard ratio [HR], 2.519; 95% CI, 1.082 to 5.863; p=0.032, NRLN metastasis: HR, 2.529; 95% CI, 1.160 to 5.512; p=0.020) (Table 3). Additionally, patients with EOD grade 2 and EOD grade 3 had an increased risk of a short- ened castration-resistant-free interval relative to those with EOD grade 0 (EOD 2: HR, 4.429; 95% CI, 1.636 to 11.995; p=0.003, EOD 3: HR, 8.451; 95% CI, 2.644 to 27.012; p≤0.001). 2. Step 2 The first evaluation conducted in step 2, the “response to chemotherapy,” is shown in Table 2; the factors that poten- tially affected the response to chemotherapy were analyzed. The response to chemotherapy was not sig- nificantly different among clinicopathologic parameters that we evaluated, such as patient age, initial serum PSA level, baseline hemoglobin level, Gleason score, EOD with bone metastasis, and lymph node metastasis site by use of multiple logistic regression with the backward stepwise method. There was no statistical difference between the re- sponse to chemotherapy and any parameter that we eval- uated, including the site of lymph node metastasis (p=0.666 and 0.276, respectively). The second evaluation conducted in step 2 was “can- cer-specific survival.” The cancer-specific survival was not significantly reduced according to the site of lymph node metastasis by Kaplan-Meier analysis (p=0.111 and 0.105,