# Which p-value is more reliable for this survival analysis, likelihood ratio test or wald test?

Given the following output from R, the p-values from the likelihood ratio test and wald test are quite different. There is a warning message "Ran out of iterations and did not converge". Can someone help explain this situation?

> summary(coxph(Surv(years,status) ~ feature, data=tmp))
Call:
coxph(formula = Surv(years, status) ~ feature, data = tmp)

n= 74, number of events= 30

coef  exp(coef)   se(coef)      z Pr(>|z|)
feature -7.662e+01  5.326e-34  1.365e+04 -0.006    0.996

exp(coef) exp(-coef) lower .95 upper .95
feature 5.326e-34  1.877e+33         0       Inf

Concordance= 0.547  (se = 0.027 )
Rsquare= 0.078   (max possible= 0.962 )
Likelihood ratio test= 5.99  on 1 df,   p=0.01442
Wald test            = 0  on 1 df,   p=0.9955
Score (logrank) test = 1.71  on 1 df,   p=0.1909

Warning message:
In fitter(X, Y, strats, offset, init, control, weights = weights,  :
Ran out of iterations and did not converge


The information below may help. The feature variable is not normally distributed.

table(tmp[,"status"], tmp[,"feature"])

              3.32193 3.5223 3.55332 4.04619 4.56255 4.67836 7.10919
0=censored       38      1       1       1       1       1       1
1=event          30      0       0       0       0       0       0