“a numerical trend”

An unexpected finding was the statistically nonsignificant difference in root resorption between groups, despite a numerical trend favoring MARPE ( P = 0.09), suggesting potentially similar mild effects or a need for larger sample sizes to detect subtle differences.

In the subgroup of patients younger than 40 years old, a numerical trend was observed in favour of systemic therapy after primary surgery compared with systemic therapy alone in terms of BCSS (SHR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.64–1.03; and P =0.09).

Although extracranial metastases were similarly distributed between groups, there was a numerical trend suggesting a higher prevalence among excluded patients (excluded patients: n = 93, 89.4%; included patients: n = 147, 81.2%; p = 0.091).

Operative duration demonstrated a numerical trend favoring the TLA group (85.38 ± 38.71 min vs. 97.33 ± 36.88 min, P = 0.091).

No significant differences were found in baseline characteristics between the intervention group (n = 161) and the control group (n = 160), but there was a numerical trend toward more participants with previous vascular events in the control group (p = 0.092).

Subgroup analyses Metastatic burden significantly stratified PFS (p=0.001), while a numerical trend was observed for OS (p=0.094), indicating poorer outcomes in the subgroup with ≥2 metastatic organs ( Figure 5 ).

A numerical trend favoring cemiplimab was observed in GHS/QoL in the ECOG PS 1 subgroup (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.41–1.08; p = .0949) 16 and in the subgroup with PD‐L1 expression from >60% to <90% (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.33–1.17; p = .1336). 12 A favorable trend toward cemiplimab was also observed in TTD analysis of

However, a numerical trend in favor of the combination was observed in the PD-L1 positive subgroup (HR for PFS 0.60; 95% CI 0.32–1.11; p = 0.099).

As for ECV, which is a complex measure, involving myocardial and blood T1 times as well as hematocrit, there was no difference in terms of global ECV between patients with and without nsVT; still, it is worth noting that there was a numerical trend towards higher septal ECV values in nsVT patients compared to those without nsVT (30.5 ± 7.2 vs. 27.7 ± 5.6; p = 0.099).

While the 0.3 mg/kg dose showed a numerical trend toward reduction, it did not consistently meet the threshold for significance across our replicates ( p = 0.0997).

Although not statistically significant, a numerical trend toward improved OS was observed in the none or small amount ascites subgroup (16.6 vs. 12.0 months; p = 0.10; Figure 1D ). 3.3 Prognostic factors To investigate prognostic factors associated with treatment outcomes in advanced GC patients with PM from HIPEC combined with PD-1 inhibitor and systemic chemotherapy, baseline clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters were analyzed using univariable Cox regression.

Comparison of expression patterns among Prl2c members shows that Prlc1 and Prlc5 are expressed at much lower levels, while Prl2c2 and Prl2c3 exhibit relatively high expression; similar to Prlc2, Prl2c3 is expressed on day 2 and exhibits a numerical trend (p = 0.10) at day 1 ( Suppl.

In the right panel of Figure 4 , the second set of bars shows a numerical trend toward planning to reach a higher criterion for difficult items, t (34) = 1.68, p = .10, d = .28.

We observed a numerical trend towards higher FAAVI rate with increasing patients number (p=0.10).

Estimated intraoperative blood loss showed a numerical trend toward lower values in the uRATS group (42 mL [IQR 0–58] vs. 50 mL [IQR 48–100]; p = 0.106; Figure 2 B), but this difference did not reach statistical significance.

Additionally, there was a numerical trend toward fewer CD4+ T cells expressing Tim3 which did not reach statistical significance (17.0% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.109) (Fig. 2 e).

Long-term survival outcomes While a numerical trend favored the laparoscopic approach, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no statistically significant difference in either 5-year DFS rates (65.69% vs. 59.3%; P = 0.110) or 5-year OS rates (75.1% vs. 62.8%; P = 0.088) (Fig. 2 ).

The main effect of response type also approached significant ( F (1,27) = 2.73, p = 0.11, ŋ 2 = 0.011) with a numerical trend for higher perceived effort during naming (3.76 ± 0.77) as compared to reaching condition (3.52 ± 1.09).

The treatment effect on energy balance showed a numerical trend in the early lactation trial ( P = 0.11) of a lower negative energy balance in the treatment group during, while no differences were observed during the mid-lactation trial ( P = 0.35).

There was a numerical trend towards more appropriate sensing in patients implanted with the 15 cm as compared to the 17 cm ICD lead (93.5% vs. 81.5%, p = 0.11).

HAZ was recorded with a numerical trend (beta 0.04, 95% CI −0.01–0.09, p = 0.11).

For example, a randomized controlled trial ( n = 98) reported that the rate of one-year ovarian failure was significantly reduced from 80.6% in the chemotherapy-alone group to 44.7% in the GnRHa group ( p = 0.002), with benefit observed across HR+ and HR− subgroups, though statistical significance was reached only in the HR+ subgroup ( p = 0.029); the HR− subgroup showed a numerical trend that did not reach significance ( p = 0.111) [ 32 ].

PP2, despite a numerical trend ( p = 0.115).

In multivariate analysis adjusted as described above, a numerical trend ( P = 0.12) toward more cartilage volume loss in the medial compartment in Ext+ patients was found with statistical significance at the medial femur ( P = 0.053) (data not shown).

However, early relapses (within the first 2 months of adjuvant treatment, n = 17) proved particularly difficult, with a significant reduction in the second PFS (PFS2, HR 1.83, p = 0.029) ( Figure 4 C) and a numerical trend for reduced OS2 (HR 1.77, p = 0.12), compared to relapses that had occurred after 2 months (n = 124).