“near significance”

A trend for a higher mean percentage of CD8+ve/TNF-α+ve T cells was found in CP CML patients compared to controls with a near significance (P = 0.059) level and reaching a statistically significant level when compared with IM Res patients ( p =0.005).

Like in pigs, the increase in the percentage of collagen was accompanied by enhanced clustering degree with correlation near significance (Rho = 0.38 and p-value = 0.059) ( Figure 3 C).

No significant pairwise comparisons were found in BLSA, but the e3e3 versus e3e4 and e3e3 versus e4e4 comparisons were near significance ( P = 0.059).

The difference although nonsignificant was more prominent in Lequesne compared with WOMAC so that in one subscale called “activities of daily life” it was near significance level ( P = .059) in favor of PRGF.

Folic acid showed near significance (HR 0.81; p = 0.059).

On the rotarod, before KEED intervention, there were no significant effects or interactions, although the effect of epoch was near significance (two‐way RM ANOVA, epoch: F [1,23] = 3.939, p = 0.0592).

Additionally, although the main three-way interaction in NAcc changes to near significance after correction for two ROIs ( P =0.06), many of the follow-up ANOVA effects that drive this interaction do survive correction for two ROIs.

This analysis did not evidence other significant effects, although the effect of PPI factor was near significance [F(2,56) = 2.95, p = .06].

Results obtained show that age had no significant effect on the amplitude of response, although in red conditions (600 nm) some effects od near significance was observed [ F (1, 79) = 3.51; p -value = 0.06], perhaps due to lack of power.

Concentrations for most of the frequently detected metabolites were generally higher in Salinas compared with Oakland children, with DMs and metolachlor at or near significance ( p = 0.06 and 0.03, respectively).

In air‐exposed mice, airway responsiveness assessed using R RS was lower in the mice that received cecal contents from castrated versus sham castrated mice, an effect that reached statistical significance at the 10 mg/ml of dose of methacholine and near significance (.05 < p < .06) at the 30 mg/ml of dose of methacholine (Figure 4b ).

We found a positive correlation between baseline caudate volume and TTS change from baseline to 12-month measurements that was near significance (r = 0.21, p = 0.06); that is, those with a larger caudate at baseline tended to show less subsequent improvement in tic symptoms ( Table 3 , Figure 1 ).

The increased spleen masses were statistically significant (n=3; p=0.009) whereas increases in length were near significance (n=3; p=0.060).

As it was significant for 9 subjects and near significance (p = 0.06) for 2 subjects, the linear regression analysis can be considered reliable.

Analysis of these data confirms that the tumor burden in the trastuzumab only group was significantly greater (p = 0.04) than that of the trastuzumab + FUS + MBs group (mean tumor volume = 25 ± 17 mm 3 vs 8 ± 5 mm 3 ), and near significance (p = 0.06) was observed between the trastuzumab + FUS + MBs group and the control group (24 ± 7 mm 3 ).

4B , R = 0.4179, p = 0.0023), and near significance for serum cholesterol and tumor DHT ( Fig. 4C , R = 0.2613, p = 0.06).

In line, metabolomics showed near significance of reduced levels of tyrosine (l2fc = −0.47, adjusted p-value = 0.06), suggesting an active tyrosine catabolism.

Induction of IFN-λ3 upon MERS-CoV-nsp2 expression was near significance (p=0.06) ( Figure 1D ); whereby IFN-λ3 was not impacted by MERS-CoV-nsp5 ( Figure 1D ).

The differences between means in the education variable were near significance ( p = 0.06).

By contrast, the PGLS regression of 90 var and Sensitivity ave remains significant at P = 0.029 ( Figure 4 ) and the PGLS regression of 90 var and Sensitivity max is near significance at P = 0.060.

The effect of ROI was near significance ( F 2, 17 = 2.991, P = .06), with the highest activity within the dACC ( Fig. 7E ).

Significant differences were also found comparing relative HGS to SAD but not OLD, which was near significance ( p -value < 0.06) in Fig. 4 .

There was a significant correlation between both variables (r = 0.55, p< 0.001; Pearson) in the whole cohort, however results were different in each group: No correlation in the No BT group, r = 0.59, p< 0.001 the anti-TNF group, r = 0.79, p = 0.002 the anti-CD20 group, and near significance r = 0.50, p = 0.060 the anti-IL6R/CTLA-4 group.

This association was near significance statistically (P=0.06).

Moreover, flexion/extension amplitude also exhibited a p -value near significance ( p = 0.06) in the pre- and post-treatment comparison conducted before the fatigue exercise. 4.