Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a numerical trend”

1,013 sentences · 1,013 papers · 1,817 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

While more patients experienced dostarlimab-related AEs (71%) than pembrolizumab-related AEs (57%), a numerical trend favoring dostarlimab was observed in the proportion of patients experiencing immune-related adverse events (irAEs) (31% for dostarlimab plus chemotherapy and 39% for pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy), serious adverse events (SAEs) (41% and 48%, respectively), AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (29% and 38%, respectively), and AEs leading to immunotherapy discontinuation (17% and 24%, respectively) (Table 5 ).
8 In another phase 3 study ( NCT00337103 ), eribulin-treated patients did not have a significant improvement in OS as compared to patients treated with capecitabine in the first, second, or third line of chemotherapy in the metastatic setting, although a numerical trend favoring eribulin was demonstrated. 9 Interestingly, in a subsequent pooled analysis of both of these trials, eribulin was seen to have a significant improvement in OS, as compared to the control arm.
At first sight, the lack of a modulation of SOA effects in comparisons involving oculomotor Task 2 responses might appear to be at odds with the significant modulation of the SOA effect reported above (there was even a numerical trend towards oculomotor subordination instead of dominance), especially since previous research has provided strong evidence for a general prioritization of the oculomotor system over all other effector systems.
Notably, a numerical trend towards inferior outcomes was observed in highly immunogenic brain metastases characterized by combined adenosine pathway activation and high PD-L1 expression (adenosine high/PD-L1 high), which may indicate a clinically relevant high-risk phenotype and further underscore the unmet medical need for an expansion of immunotherapeutic strategies in brain metastases.
Taken together with the analysis of the primary endpoint in Table 3 , these results show that there is a numerical trend of continuous improvement in pain (API-NRS) from baseline to week 6 and a stabilization of the response between 6 and 8 weeks (ie, no additional improvement in pain intensity) in the LY3526318 arm, while the response to placebo shows continuous improvement.
Post hoc analyses by patient subgroups At week 28, patients stratified by prior and non-prior anti-TNF use showed similar ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 response rates in the placebo → CZP and CZP → CZP groups, although there was a numerical trend for slightly higher response rates in the anti-TNF naïve patients (Fig. 3a ).
These changes showed a numerical trend towards benefit but were not statistically significant between high‐dose and placebo groups in either the mITT population ( P = 0.56) or ITT population ( P = 0.071) but certainly suggest a preservation of fat mass despite ongoing cachexia.
The results for the two RWSs [ 1 , 33 ] with BCVA change measured at 6 months showed a numerical trend of higher improvement for aflibercept compared with ranibizumab, but the difference was not statistically significant ( n = 84, MD 5.09, 95% CI − 16.19 to 26.37, P = 0.64) (Fig. 2 ), similar to the subgroup of patients with non-ischemic CRVO (Supplementary Materials Table S10 ).