“nominally significant”

In addition, there was substantial enrichment of nominally significant associations ( p <0.05) among disease SNPs.

In the entire cohort, the only nominally significant correlation was an inverse relationship between plasma C4-ana and predicted C4B expression ( ρ = −0.37, p = 0.05).

However, to avoid overlooking candidates of potential biological significance, for just the 6 h set, only nominally significant terms ( p < 0.05) are reported.

Although the proteomic profiles of the 21 cyclophosphamide responders versus 14 non-responders overlapped by PCA ( Supplemental Data S3 ; Document S1 : Data S1 B, Figure S2 ; Tables S4 and S5 ), several immune-related proteins (e.g., IGHE, KIT, CD80, and IL-34) showed nominally significant differences ( p < 0.05), none of which remained significant after FDR correction.

All showed a concordant effect direction between the GWAS prospective and GWAS retrospective (p=0·0005, binomial sign test), with six loci nominally significant (GWAS prospective p<0·050) and one significant after Bonferroni correction for the 12 loci (rs3851357, GWAS prospective p=0·0035).

(i) The MR results using the Wald ratio or IVW methods show a nominally significant association with LUAD or LUSC risk ( P value < 0.05).

To verify the reliability of these polygenic associations, we repeated the analyses using PRS comprising only the 108 sentinel genome-wide significant schizophrenia variants 15 , based on the assumption that the effect size estimates of genome-wide significant variants should be less affected by population structure than non-significant variants; 77 of the 104 associated traits were nominally significant ( P < 0.05) based on the PRS comprising only genome-wide significant variants.

In contrast, the mean intensity of PC was inversely associated with TNFR2 and VCAM-1, whereas Cer(d) was positively associated with fibrinogen, and PE(O) was negatively associated with TNFR2; however, these correlations were only nominally significant ( P < 0.05).

Gene-based analysis revealed 76 nominally significant ( p ≤ 0.050) longevity-associated genes, and we call these 76 genes the “longevity-associated gene set” (Tables S3 and S4 ).

Nominally significant gene-trait associations ( P < 0.05) from the imputed blood transcriptome were enriched (OR = 1.64, P = 0.030, Fisher’s exact test) with GRNs that are associated with the top 4 microglia TFs (IRF8, ATF5, SPI1, TAL1) (Fig. 4 C).

Also, the association between sentinel variants in the FoxP1 gene and diagnosis of IPF was nominally significant ( p < 0.05) rather than genome-wide significant.

Specifically, we identified a total of 169 nominally significant enriched terms ( p -value < 0.05 and FDR < 0.2), which represent a medium-confidence set, including a subset of 37 high-confidence terms that passed multiple test correction with an FDR of <0.05 ( Figure 3 ).

If the proportion of nominally significant results ( P < 0.05, same direction of effect as the overall median outcome for the given signature) when the biopsy was excluded was <80% of the proportion of nominally significant results when the biopsy was included, we considered any overall finding of differential gene set expression as nonrobust.

Of these, 10 had significantly different effect sizes ( p -value < 7.8 × 10 −4 , Bonferroni correction for 64 variants) and 22 were nominally significant ( p -value < 0.05).

In total, 115/130 GEIs were nominally significant ( p < 0.05) and directionally concordant with estimates from the replication set (Supplementary Data 13 ).

We also annotated whether the association reported in each meta-analytic estimate was nominally significant at a P < 0.05 level as well as at a P < 0.005 level.

When we restrict the comparisons to the European lead SNPs that are also nominally significant in the Hispanic sample (p < 0.05), the concordance is almost perfect: 100% for total cholesterol (19/19, p-value = 2 × 10 −6 ), 94.4% for HDL cholesterol (17/18, p-value = 7 × 10 −5 ), 100% for LDL cholesterol (15/15, p-value = 3 × 10 −5 ), and 100% for triglycerides (11/11, p-value = 5 × 10 −4 ) ( Supplemental File 4 ).

Fourteen MGSs were nominally significant for the broad spectrum (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, unadjusted p < 0.05).

Lead SNPs rs4112328 ( LHX8, 1p31.1 ) , rs28361060 ( TSBP1, 6p21.32) and rs7870795 (FOXE1, 9q22.33) had the smallest p-values in the "all cases" GWAS and were nominally significant ( P < 0.05) in the same direction across all subgroups.

5 A), while Hannum’s IEAA, Zhang’s EEAA, and raw epiTOC were only nominally significant ( p value < 0.05).

Multivariable modelling and the relations between predictor variables All predictor variables having shown nominally significant (p < 0.05) effects on hand preference in univariable testing (i.e. all but maternal smoking) were then included in the multivariable analysis, using general linear modelling (Methods), with hand preference as the dependent variable.

Although no striatal gene expression changes reached significance following FDR correction (FDR <0.1) in HTT-ASO-treated YAC128 mice at the 6-month time point, we identified 105 downregulated and 148 upregulated genes that were nominally significant ( p < 0.05) in response to treatment ( Table S2 ).

Variable Selection Based on linear mixed models including the factors of time, age at enrollment, sex, and stimulus version, 23 speech variables from the picture description task showed nominally significant ( P < 0.05) effects of time at the group level.

While none of the GO terms from the trio univariate GSEA met the FDR significance threshold, nominally significant (p < 0.05) pathways suggest some overlap with Cohort 1 results, including neuron recognition , cerebral cortex cell migration and axonal fasciculation and GO terms related to.

In a per-protein analysis, replacing values below the limit of detection with protein specific LOD-values, five proteins (CSF-1, NTRK3, ICOSLG, SCF and PECAM-1) were found to have nominally significant differences between the two time-points (p < 0.05, Wilcox test).