Barely Significant

Excerpts

3,685 sentences · 1 filter applied

nominally significantp = 0.2354.7× alphagold
Cyclophosphamide dose, which appeared nominally significant in the untransformed analysis ( Supplementary Table S1 ), was not replicated in the log-transformed model (β = −0.001, p = 0.235), suggesting that the original signal reflected the combined influence of AMH non-normality, regimen-structured collinearity, and the small number of cyclophosphamide-treated patients ( n = 12/75) rather than a true independent pharmacological effect.
a significant trendp = 0.244.8× alphagold
Subgroup analysis showed significantly higher HR from retrospective studies (HR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.09–3.29, z = 2.27, p = 0.02, τ 2 = 0.20, I2 = 44.71%), while such a significant trend was not confirmed pooling results from RCTs (HR: 1.70, 95% CI: 0.70–4.08, z = 1.18, p = 0.24, τ 2 = 0.61, I2 = 63.91%), among which a significant heterogeneity occurred ( Supplementary Materials—Figure S12 ).
showed a trendp = 0.2474.9× alpha
Regarding the subgroup of patients with a TPS score > 50%, the parameter PET-Skewness also showed a trend in favor of patients with a value below the above-mentioned threshold (HR for disease progression or death, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.22 to 1.48; p = 0.247; Figure 5 A).
a weak trendp = 0.2505.0× alphagold
In normal tissue samples from tumor proximity (n = 30), a high stromal CD66b+ cell density was a negative prognostic factor ( p = 0.037) ( Figure 2 C), while in normal tissue from the periphery of resected tissue, only a weak trend towards worse prognosis was observed ( p = 0.250) ( Figure 2 D).
marginally significantp < 0.255.0× alphagold
The initial multivariate model included the following five factors that were found to be significant or marginally significant ( i.e ., p < 0.25) based on the initial screen: initial cytogenetic, previous disease/prior SCT, age at transplant, transplant type/source and conditioning intensity.
showed a trendp = 0.499.8× alpha
The study comparing the combination therapy of carboplatin and gemcitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy showed a trend toward longer overall survival (OS) (6.7 months vs. 4.8 months, p = 0.49) and progression free survival (PFS) (4.1 months vs. 3.0 months, p = 0.36) in the combination therapy group, although the results were not statistically significant [ 13 ].