Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantp=2.7×10 −80.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Quantitative analysis evidenced a highly significant MEK5 6.2-fold increase (p=2.7×10 −8 ) and ERK5 5.5-fold increase (p=2.2×10 −9 ) in tumoral samples when compared to normal tissue ( figure 1j ).
MEK5 promotes lung adenocarcinoma.
Eur Respir J · 2019 · PMC6393765
borderline significantp = 2.76×10 −80.0× alphagold
When the analysis was stratified by gender, one additional SNP (rs549485) located about 350 kb apart from the SAA1 subregion at 11p14 in the secretion regulating guanine nucleotide exchange factor ( SERGEF ) gene showed a borderline significant association with A-SAA levels in men (p = 2.76×10 −8 ) in the meta-analysis.
highly significantp -value = 2.76×10 −80.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Comparing the full set of 1377 differentially expressed genes to those contained within the gene ontology term “central nervous system myelination” (accession number GO:0022010), we found highly significant enrichment of myelination-related genes (Fisher’s exact test, odds ratio = 3.66, p -value = 2.76×10 −8 ).
highly significantp = 2.83e-080.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Strong and highly significant positive correlations were observed bilaterally between MMSE scores and GMV in the hippocampus (Right: R = 0.542, p = 2.83e-08; Left: R = 0.517, p = 1.59e-07), amygdala (Right: R = 0.48, p = 1.47e-06; Left: R = 0.403, p = 7.38e-05), and parahippocampal gyrus (Right: R = 0.45, p = 7.59e-06; Left: R = 0.407, p = 6.18e-05).
extremely significantP = 2.92 × 10 –80.0× alphaqualified
Protein-coding regions displayed 11.29-fold enrichment, 5’ UTR regions achieved 8.00-fold enrichment, while extended intronic regions showed 1.32-fold enrichment at extremely significant levels ( P = 2.92 × 10 –8 ), suggesting that these regions may participate in complex genetic mechanisms through regulation of gene expression or function.
did not reach statistical significanceP = 3.0 × 10 −80.0× alpha
The risk allele G of rs7535263 was also more frequent in cases (allele frequency, 64 of 104 [62%]) of cohort 2 compared with controls (allele frequency, 1451 of 2584 [56%]) but did not reach statistical significance, most likely representing an underpowered comparison (combined meta-analysis (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38-0.77; P = 3.0 × 10 −8 ) ( Figure 4 ).
nominally significantP = 3.05 × 10 −80.0× alphagold
Also, for the women-only primary analysis, the rs77186623 in LOC105375745 locus associated with HIPadjBMI (β = −0.006, P = 1.74 × 10 −7 ) exhibited nominally significant interaction by background group ( I 2 = 55.3%, P diff = 0.042) and was GWS in the Caribbean group ( N = 3231, MAF = 0.041, β = −0.0078, P = 3.05 × 10 −8 ) but not significant in the mainland group ( N = 4216, MAF = 0.008, β = −0.0015, P = 0.567, Supplementary Material, Table S7 ).