“highly significant”

Tumor-to-blood ratios increased significantly over time for both tracers; however, [ 52 Mn]Mn-BPPA-bevacizumab demonstrated significantly higher ratios from day 2 onward, with the difference becoming highly significant at days 3, 5, 7, and 10 ( p < 0.0001).

The difference between the groups was highly significant ( P < 0.0001), reinforcing LDAR as a robust prognostic biomarker for ICU mortality in septic patients with malignancies.

Friedman’s test proved that the effect of the stimulus on perceived fear was highly significant (chi-square = 6130.252, df = 41, P < 0.0001).

ANOVA analysis in T-47D cells though showed significant but only MBD1 & MBD2 genes have highly significant P <0.0001 change in protein expression concerning resveratrol.

The ANOVA for the regression model ( Table 2 ) indicated the model was highly significant ( p < 0.0001, R 2 = 98.67%).

Similarly, the model for DPPH IC 50 was highly significant (F = 134.20, p < 0.0001), indicating that the mixture composition strongly influenced antioxidant activity.

For BPA doses, however, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated highly significant among-group differences ( F = 7.87 ; p < 0.0001 ), and subsequent Bonferroni post hoc comparisons indicated significant differences between placebo and each exposure ( t = 3.2 , p < 0.01 for 2 ng / g ; t = 2.8 , p < 0.01 for 20 ng / g ; t = 4.0 , p < 0.0001 for 100 ng / g ; and t = 5.4 , p < 0.0001 for 500 ng / g ).

For bone-marrow spaces percentages and inflammatory cells, they were also highly significant ( p < 0.0001), and Group II (positive control) was significantly worse than all others ( p < 0.0001).

In LNCaP cells, we found that the list of DEGs upregulated in physioxia (5% O 2 ) shows a highly significant correlation ( p < 0.0001) with the PCTA gene expression data, whereas the DEGs upregulated at 18% O 2 has no significant correlation with the PCTA data.

As shown in Figure S1a , HER2 mRNA expression levels among different patients exhibited highly significant correlation in the analyses by microarray and qRT-PCR (r = 0.94, p < 0.0001), validating the heterogeneous expression of HER2 mRNA in primary HER2-positive BCs.

Statistical analysis revealed that the reductions in biofilm biomass at concentrations ≥6.25 μg/mL were highly significant (**** p < 0.0001) compared with untreated controls. 2.6.

The Wilcoxon rank-sum test ( Figure 7 ) confirmed that the observed difference in dissolution rate between DIW and sweat was highly significant (Z = −4.50, p < 0.0001).

Second Study Rooting success was associated with a highly significant interaction between rooting environment and hormone treatment (F 8,15 = 137.93; p < 0.0001), with the model explaining 99.3% of the observed variance (R 2 = 0.99).

Highly significant difference were also found between the scores of four education groups (p = 0.0001).

When the areas of H-reflexes (averaged daily) elicited by single and burst stimuli were compared these differences were highly significant ( Sign and Wilcoxon tests, P<0.0001) indicating that burst stimulation attenuated by about 50% the area of H-reflexes elicited by single pulses.

The difference in heme levels between the Sham group and the ischemic core region was highly significant (P < 0.0001) ( Fig. 2 d).

Moreover, the correlations between spike protein and neutralizing antibody levels were both highly significant ( P <0.0001) at 0·75 in men and 0·76 in women.

The SiO 2 content in the hybrid materials is described by a statistically highly significant model ( p < 0.0001) with a high robustness R2 pred = 0.9459 and, hence, a good predictive power ( Table 2 ).

The strength of the relationship, measured using the Spearman correlation coefficient, was highly significant ( p < 0.0001) in both cases, with very high values (LU: 0.82 and UU: 0.88).

While the difference between the lignocaine and dexmedetomidine groups was not significant statistically ( P = 0.22), lignocaine/dexmedetomidine versus control indicated a highly significant difference ( P < 0.0001).

Table S2 shows that the quadratic model was highly significant (F = 224.26, p < 0.0001).

Differences were considered to be significant at different p -values: p > 0.05 was considered non-significant, p < 0.05 (*) significant, p < 0.01 (**) very significant, p < 0.001 (***) highly significant, and p < 0.0001 (****) extremely significant. 3.

The P for trend remained highly significant across all models ( p < 0.0001).

The primary patient-derived xenografts used for this study displayed a wide range of tumor hypoxia (1%–39%) that was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), whereas there was relatively little variance in the levels of hypoxia within replicates from the same model ( Figure 1 A).

The Spearman’s rho test showed a highly significant correlation ( r = 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47–0.72, P < 0.0001); the bias between the two determinations (Bland–Altman test) was −0.33 (95% CI, −12.8–12.1; Supplemental Fig. 1 ).