Although the low ACSL4 group showed a trend toward a higher recurrence rate (5.56% vs 1.52%), the difference did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the limited number of events (Table 2 ).
1
—
—
Although the low ACSL4 group showed a trend toward a higher recurrence rate (5.56% vs 1.52%), the difference did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the limited number of events (Table 2 ).