“nominally significant”

Look-ups in consortium data showed a nominally significant association for the leptin-decreasing allele of rs10487505 with higher BMI in the GIANT Consortium ( P =0.03, N =221,677), as well as with increased risk of early-onset obesity ( P =0.04, N =13,848) and higher birth weight ( P =0.02, N =26,836) in the EGG Consortium ( Supplementary Table 7 ).

Examining males and females separately, a case-control analysis indicated that rs2144025 was nominally significant for the presence of bipolar disorder in females in a recessive model (p = 0.03) (Tables 3 & 4 ), but not in males.

For secondary outcomes Sativex was associated with a nominally significant improvement in hyperactivity/impulsivity (p=0.03) and a cognitive measure of inhibition (p=0.05), and a trend towards improvement for inattention (p=0.10) and EL (p=0.11).

In addition, nominally significant associations (p = 0.03–0.05), not holding after correction for multiple testing, were found between rs3773970 and Aβ42 levels, as well as between rs4687151 and tau levels, in individuals with AD, and between rs12053868 and tau levels, as well as between rs4687151 and both Aβ42 and tau levels, in dementia free individuals (see Table 2 ).

Multivariable analyses In this final model, the demographic variables of male sex and a family history of tics remained nominally significant (OR=2.89, 95% CI 1.12–7.44, p=0.03 and OR=5.57, 95% CI 1.31–23.69, p=0.02, respectively), but parental age and parental education level were no longer associated with TS or CTD.

Among the SNPs significant in non-Hispanic whites, there was nominally significant heterogeneity across race/ethnic group for one SNP (MTHFD1 80116556; p = 0.03).

The results of linear regression analyses showed that IVB administration was significantly associated with the Language-Social domain DQ ( Table 2 ; p = 0.0115); the association between IVB and the Language-Social domain DQ remained nominally significant even after GA- and BW-adjusted analyses ( Table 3 ; p = 0.03).

When adjusting for clinical risk factors, 6 proteins were significantly associated with either MACE or HHF (FDR-adjusted p -value < 0.05), while for the time to DECLARE’s composite renal outcome, IGFBP6 was nominally significant ( p -value = 0.03; Fig. 4C–E ).

Of the seven individual mutations observed in more than 2% of tumors, we observed nominally significant higher frequency of the E545K hotspot mutation in PIK3CA (13.7% vs. 7.5%, Fisher exact test P value = 0.03) and a nonsignificant trend toward higher frequency of the splice variant in GATA3 (4.8% vs. 1.9%, Fisher exact test P value = 0.07) in H/L compared with TCGA Whites (Supplementary Table S5).

However, patients displayed increased dwell time in state B 4 ( t 537 = −2.8, p ≤ 0.005) and nominally significant increases in state D 4 ( t 537 = −2.13, p ≤ 0.03).

In addition, the FAR variant caused a nominally significant (p = 0.03) effect on OLE1 but not on SDS23 (p = 0.7), in agreement with our yeVenus reporter assay ( S4 Fig ).

Only one SNV showed a nominally significant allele frequency difference (rs6489695, p = 0.03).

Although 2-component systems did not reach the FDR 0.1 threshold in DINE-CD, it was nominally significant at P = .03.

Neither wortmannin, LY294002, A66, nor ZSTK474 (each tested at 1–10 μM) increased the lifespan of wild-type worms (Table 1 ), However, GDC-0941 – reportedly the most avid p110α inhibitor – at 1 μM extended lifespan by 10% (nominally significant, Gehans–Wilcoxon P < 0.03).

The CD101 cytoplasmic PRV group was nominally significant (HR = 2.8, p = 0.03) ( Table 3 ; Fig 3A ), but not after Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing (p = 0.09).

In the first model (Model 1) only age, gender, BMI, and Mg 2+ were included as confounding variables, resulting in a nominally significant association with reduced odds of developing diabetes (OR = 0.844 CI 95% 0.727–0.980, p < 0.03).

Only Enoyl-CoA hydratase in butyrate pathway ( K01692 ) and carbamoyl-phosphate synthase ( K01955 ) in alanine, aspartate and glutamate metabolism showed nominally significant differences ( P = .03, 0.006 [ t -test]).

In contrast, limited coordinated immune remodeling was observed between CB and NCB patients; only one population, CD3 + CD8 + PD-1 + PD-L1 + T cells, showed a nominally significant ( p = 0.030, q = 0.87, Wilcoxon rank-sum test) increase following treatment, preferentially in NCB patients ( Figure 5 B).

Results Demography There was an overall nominally significant sex difference in mean age ( t (56) = 2.2, p = 0.03).

In exploratory analyses, treatment with vericiguat resulted in flow-mediated dilation mean difference of 0.7%, (95% confidence interval: −1.1% to 2.5%, p = 0.40) and a nominally significant reduction of log NTproBNP of −0.42 (95% confidence interval: −0.81 to −0.04, p = 0.03).

There was a nominally significant excess of heart failure (HR 1.34, 95% CI:1.03 to 1.75, p=0.03) but no associations with other studied cardiac outcomes.

Except for a nominally significant association to verbal learning for individuals with psychosis ( β = −0.11, p = 0.03), there were no significant associations between the PGS SCZ and the remaining cognitive phenotypes (numerical values for β s, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and p values for both participants with psychosis and healthy controls are presented in Supplementary Table S1 ).

Only TG showed nominally significant difference between the three stenosis groups ( P = 0.03), followed by a nonsignificant trend of difference observed for TC ( P = 0.43) ( Table 1 ).

None of these nine variants were associated with age-at-onset (Online Resources 7) after Bonferroni correction, however, EBF3 showed nominally significant association with a later age-at-onset of 0.8 years (79.0 years) compared to the major allele (78.2 years; p = 0.03).

When controlling for CAG size using the adjustment method, we found a significantly reduced expansion frequency in Htt Q175neo+ (two-proportion z -test, P < 0.01), while the effect was only nominally significant when adjusting through the modeling methodology (two-proportion z -test, P = 0.03; Bonferroni corrected significance threshold P = 0.0167), likely due to the reduced sample size enforced by this methodology ( Figure 7D and Table S3 ).