Table 3.
Genes differentially expressed between parous TNBCs, parous non-TNBCs and nulliparous non-TNBCs
| Parous TNBCs (A) | Parous non-TNBCs (B) | Nulliparous non-TNBCs (C) | A versus B | A versus C | B versus C | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CXCL1 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.1 ± 0.0 | * | *** | ns |
| CXCL12 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 3.4 ± 0.5 | 2.3 ± 0.3 | *** | * | ns |
| ELN | 1.0 ± 0.4 | 2.2 ± 0.4 | 3.3 ± 0.7 | ** | ** | ns |
| ERBB2 | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 25.8 ± 8.4 | 5.6 ± 1.1 | *** | *** | ns |
| ESR1 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 23.7 ± 5.1 | 49.9 ± 14.4 | *** | *** | ns |
| FBN1 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 2.5 ± 0.5 | ** | ** | ns |
| IL1A | 1.0 ± 0.7 | 0.1 ± 0.0 | 0.1 ± 0.0 | * | ** | ns |
| IL8 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.4 ± 0.1 | 0.4 ± 0.2 | ** | ** | ns |
| MMP12 | 1.0 ± 0.5 | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.4 ± 0.2 | * | * | ns |
| MMP2 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 1.9 ± 0.3 | 2.0 ± 0.4 | * | * | ns |
| PGR | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 154.1 ± 75.4 | 162.8 ± 57.0 | *** | *** | ns |
| TGFB3 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 3.3 ± 0.4 | 4.2 ± 0.7 | *** | *** | ns |
| THBS1 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 2.6 ± 0.6 | *** | *** | ns |
| TIMP2 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 2.0 ± 0.3 | *** | ** | ns |
Statistical analysis was done using delta Ct values or housekeeping-gene adjusted gene expression (see Additional file 1). For the ease of presenting these differences, delta Ct values were anti-logged and expressed as fold-changes relative to parous TNBC group (A) as seen in the table below. All genes were significantly differently expressed in the parous TNBC group compared to the other two groups based on ANOVA followed by Tukey’s HSD test. The values for the parous (B) and nulliparous non-TNBCs (C) were not significantly different from each other. TNBC nulliparous group was not included since it contains only one sample. CT values were normalized to parous TNBC group (A). Averages ± SE shown
ns not significant
For Tukey’s HSD test * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001 significant levels