Barely Significant
← all phrases

trending toward significance

117 sentences · 117 papers · 682 search hits before verification

In the literature

trending toward significancep = 0.010.2× alpha
Conversion of pre-NAC biomarker profiles of HR+HER2– and HR+HER2+ to triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) post-NAC may be associated with worse event-free survival, hazard ratios of 2.23 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.90–5.53; p = 0.08), trending toward significance, and 36.7 (95 % CI, 2.2–610.8; p = 0.01), respectively.
trending toward significanceP = .05361.1× alpha
We observe a positive correlation trending toward significance (Pearson’s R = 0.449, P = .0536) between somatic ATRX VAF and a higher TelomereHunter T/N telomere content ratio and this was not driven by tumor purity ( Supplementary Figure 3D ).
trending toward significanceP = .0541.1× alpha
Interaction between treatment and continuous Trop-2 expression for OS was marginally significant (range, P = .04 to 0.05); interaction between treatment and Trop-2 H-score quartiles for OS was trending toward significance ( P = .054; Data Supplement, Table S5).
trending toward significanceP = 0.0541.1× alpha
Upon final analysis, there was significant benefit for SG in patients with the two highest quartiles of TROP2 expression (220–275 and 275–300), The interaction between treatment and continuous TROP2 expression for OS was marginally significant (range, P = 0.04–0.05), and the interaction between treatment and TROP2 H -score expression by quartiles for OS was trending toward significance ( P = 0.054).
Being employed was predictive of a more sensitive style (B=4.02, t=3.42; p =0.003) and, trending toward significance, a less controlling style (B=-2.77, t=-1.96; p =0.06); in contrast, being employed was not predictive of an unresponsive style (B=-1.05, t=-1.01; p =0.32) or of appropriate mind-related (B=-0.23, t=-1.04; p =0.32) or nonattuned mind-related (B=-0.02, t=-0.09; p =0.92) comments.
trending toward significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
Posterior strain was tensile, trending toward significance with larger strains in lower lumbar levels ( p = 0.06, Figure 4B ); posterior tensile axial strain increased between L1–L2 (4.2% strain) and L4–L5 (7.9%) and L5–S1 (7.8%). 3.1.2 Change in wedge angle ( ΔW ) Flexion caused a decrease in wedge angle, where level has a significant effect ( p = 0.001, Figure 4C ).