Table III.
CLIC (N=127) |
PACT (N=191) |
CLIC + PACT (meta-analytic results) (N=318) |
|||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MT | FP | Difference (MT - FP) |
MT | FP | Difference (MT - FP) |
MT | FP | Difference (MT - FP) |
|
Log2 (LTE4: FENO) |
|||||||||
Estimate | 0.2 | −0.1 | +0.3 | 0.9 | −0.2 | +1.2 | 0.2 | −0.1 | +0.3 |
(Std. Error) | (0.18) | (0.18) | (0.12) | (0.70) | (0.69) | (0.98) | (0.17) | (0.17) | (0.12) |
P-value** | 0.60 | 0.19 | 0.009 | 0.18 | 0.73 | 0.23 | 0.16 | 0.54 | 0.008 |
Log2 LTE4 | |||||||||
Estimate | 0.6 | 0.7 | −0.1 | 0 | −0.4 | +0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0 |
(Std. Error) | (0.35) | (0.35) | (0.27) | (0.35) | (0.34) | (0.49) | (0.21) | (0.24) | (0.24) |
P-value** | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.73 | 0.89 | 0.27 | 0.50 | 0.30 | 0.61 | 0.98 |
Log2 FENO | |||||||||
Estimate | 0 | 0.4 | −0.3 | −0.2 | 0.9 | −1.0 | 0 | 0.4 | −0.3 |
(Std. Error) | (0.17) | (0.17) | (0.12) | (0.68) | (0.67) | (0.95) | (0.16) | (0.16) | (0.12) |
P-value** | 0.84 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.82 | 0.19 | 0.28 | 0.99 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
1 / (Log2 FENO) | |||||||||
Estimate | −3.0 | −4.9 | +2.0 | 2.8 | −15.0 | +17.9 | −2.8 | −5.2 | +2.1 |
(Std. Error) | (2.15) | (2.15) | (1.52) | (10.60) | (12.32) | (16.25) | (2.11) | (2.12) | (1.51) |
P-value** | 0.17 | 0.02 | 0.20 | −0.79 | 0.22 | 0.27 | 0.19 | 0.01 | 0.16 |
CLIC = 2nd 4 weeks of data in each treatment phase; PACT = weeks 4–8 of data after randomization to a treatment
P-values computed using a regression model to see if estimate (slope) is significantly different from zero. Comparison of CLIC data and CLIC+PACT data uses a mixed linear model to account for repeated measures among CLIC subjects.