“marginal significance”

C allele carriers of rs1800764 experienced more bleeding complications than those with the TT genotype with marginal significance (18.8% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.055).

On multivariate analysis, higher RT dose was identified as favorable prognostic factor with marginal significance (p = 0.055) for the LC of lesions where RT was applied ( Table 3 ).

All patients were receiving 250mg AG 4 x daily plus 20mg HC b.d. marginal significance between the rise in A4 androstenedione and the rise in 17 OH progesterone (Figure 3) (r = 0.562, P = 0.055).

At the 1-year follow-up, the EFS rates in the CAR-T[early] group and CAR-T[late] group were 48% and 30%, respectively, with marginal significance (P= 0.055), and similarly, the OS rates were 75% vs. 56% in favor of the CAR-T[early] group (P = 0.053) ( 79 ).

In the CMV-positive subjects, the percentage of monocytes tended to be lower than in the CMV-negative subjects, with marginal significance ( P = 0.055), whereas other parameters did not differ between the groups.

Likewise, the association between the features used for prakriti classification, and the trunk index scores showed marginal significance, only for a small subset of physical features of prakriti assessment ( P = 0.055) (P1).

The difference in CatS level between stable plague and unstable plague group reached marginal significance ( P = 0.055). 3.3.

1-AP also had a negative link (β = −37) with marginal significance ( P = 0.055).

While the MD for the right MLF model was not significant on sGC, it did show a marginal significance ( p = 0.055).

In HTRA1 , rs11200638 (G>A), showed marginal significance with DR (P = 0.055) while rs10490924 in LOC387715 gave a P = 0.07.

A comparison of the pairwise expression levels between miR-155-5p and mRNA BRCA1 within WBCs for each patient and carrier revealed a significant negative correlation ( p = 0.0001 and p = 0.034) ( Figure 7 A,B) for patients with breast and ovarian cancer, respectively, with marginal significance ( p = 0.055) for the carriers ( Figure 7 C), which was not the case for controls.

Multivariate logistic regression revealed that invasion of pericolorectal tissue/serosa was the independent predictor factor for positive CMR ( P < 0.001), with the marginal significance of infiltrative gross pattern ( P =0.055), while signet ring type was the independent predictor factor for positive LRM ( P =0.035) with the marginal significance of high MVD ( P =0.53) and sinusoidal vascular pattern ( P =0.54) ( Table 4 ). 4.

Additionally, while partialing out the effect of child age, there were negative correlations between the total CELF score of the child and the total number of adult utterances ( r [19] = −0.48, p = 0.031), total number of adult questions ( r [19] = −0.61, p = 0.004), number of adult closed questions ( r [19] = −0.57, p = 0.008), and marginal significance for number of adult open questions ( r [19] = −0.44, p = 0.055).

Fn was detected in both the healthy controls and periodontitis cases, whereas Peptostreptococcus anaerobius (Pa) and Eikenella corrodens (Ec) showed slightly higher detection rates in periodontitis patients with marginal significance (P-value = 0.055 and 0.076 in chi-squared tests).

13.2 months, respectively), with marginal significance ( p = 0.055, Fig. 2c ).

102.6 μmol/L, P =0.024), while IBIL showed marginal significance (68.8–84.6 μmol/L, P =0.055).

Disease-free survival of subgroups by N stage In stratified analysis by lymph node involvement, we also found an inferior DFS in 11 BRCA1 carriers (germline or somatic) than 165 non-carriers with a marginal significance in the patients without lymph node involvement (3-year DFS rate: 81.8%±11.6% vs. 95.9%±1.7%; log-rank P = 0.055; Fig 2C ).

However, the present study found that childhood trauma only predicted accelerated epigenetic aging in adulthood with marginal significance ( p = 0.055) before multiple comparison correction, suggesting that further research is necessary to confirm its robustness.

The marginal significance zone was defined as p -values between 0.05 and 0.1, indicating nominal trends. hsa-miR-23a-3p exhibited a trend for upregulation ( p = 0.055), while hsa-miR-17-3p tended to be higher in the Control group.

Impact of CFI and TRG Patients with a CFI < 6 months had shorter PFS with marginal significance (median 1.8 vs. 3,4 months, HR 1.80, 95% CI 0.97–3.34, P = 0.055) and significantly shorter OS (median 7.1 vs. 14.5 months, HR 2.42, 95% CI 1.23–4.77, P = 0.008) compared with those with a CFI ≥ 6 months (Fig. 2 ).

Several hematological ratios demonstrated marginal significance: MLR ( p = 0.055), MHR ( p = 0.027), PHR ( p = 0.039), and SII, SIRI, and NHR approached statistical significance.

001) and specific adversities including emotional abuse (B = 0.244, p < 0.001), emotional neglect (B = 0.319, p < 0.001), physical neglect (B = 0.294, p < 0.001) and with physical abuse showing marginal significance (B = 0.165, p = 0.055).

Comparing survival outcomes, patients with cross-sectional areas below 88.8 cm 2 showed lower survival rate (72.5% of 3-year DFS) than patients with cross-sectional areas above 88.8 cm 2 (87.2% of 3-year DFS), with marginal significance (P = 0.055) ( Fig. 2 ).

38.0 IU/L) was higher with marginal significance ( P = 0.055).

Further subgroup analysis demonstrated that PFS in patients with lung ADC had marginal significance ( P =0.055) ( Figure 6D ), all other stratifications did not reach statistical significance, such as the CXCL5 expression with OS and PPS in ADC or squamous cell carcinoma.