Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Neuromuscul Dis. 2016;3(3):395–404. doi: 10.3233/JND-160173

TABLE I.

Comparison of preclinical outcome measures.

Control C57
Mean ±SEM (n)
Untreated Het
Mean ±SEM (n)
EL treated
Mean ±SEM (n)
LS treated
Mean ±SEM (n)
P-value Best het group or closest to C57
ANOVA Dunnett Untreated vs EL Dunnett Untreated vs LS
Body Weight (g) 28.3 ± 0.5 (18) 32.2 ± 0.8 (18) 30.1 ± 0.5 (17) 31.0 ± 1.1 (18) 0.00446 0.1438 0.5684 EL treated
Grip Strength (N) 1.5 ± 0.05 (18) 1.1 ± 0.07 (18) 1.1 ± 0.07 (17) 1.2 ± 0.07 (18) < .0001 0.798 0.8083 LS treated
GS/BW (N/mg) * 53.5 ± 1.6 (18) 35.3 ± 2.5 (18) 34.9 ± 1.9 (17) 38.3 ± 1.9 (18) < .0001 0.997 0.5852 LS treated
Heart Weight (g) 0.14 ± 0.004 (18) 0.17 ± 0.006 (18) 0.13 ± 0.003 (17) 0.15 ± 0.005 (17) < .0001 < .0001 0.0079 EL treated
HW/BW (mg/g) * 5.0 ± 0.1 (18) 5.2 ± 0.1 (18) 4.5 ± 0.1 (17) 4.7 ± 0.1 (17) < .0001 < .0001 0.0058 EL treated
Heart Rate (bpm) 592 ± 16 (18) 605 ± 20 (18) 613 ± 18 (17) 591 ± 23 (18) 0.83173 0.9797 0.9256 LS treated
QT (ms) * 51.1 ± 2.2 (18) 51.2 ± 1.8 (18) 47.8 ± 2.7 (17) 49.9 ± 4.0 (18) 0.82311 0.7341 0.9723 EL treated
QTc (ms) 49.2 ± 1.8 (18) 52.0 ± 2.9 (18) 49.7 ± 0.8 (17) 52.5 ± 3.4 (18) 0.71999 0.849 0.9985 EL treated
MID_PeakSysSR_Mean (endocardial circumferential S−1) ND 0.42 ± 0.04 (12) 0.50 ± 0.05 (12) 0.52 ± 0.05 (11) 0.25608 $ 0.3292 0.2187 LS treated
BASE-PeakSysSR_Mean (endocardial circumferential S−1) * ND 0.37 ± 0.03 (12) 0.40 ± 0.03 (11) 0.49 ± 0.05 (11) 0.08108 $ 0.8309 0.0584 LS treated
Cardiac Fdev (mN/mm−2) * 11.6 ± 1.9 (17) 9.5 ± 2.2 (16) 4.9 ± 0.7 (12) 15.4 ± 4.4 (14) 0.07549 0.4972 0.2736 LS treated
Cardiac Fmax (mN/mm−2) 16.6 ± 2.7 (17) 16.2 ± 3.8 (16) 10.0 ± 3.3 (12) 18.2 ± 4.8 (14) 0.49797 0.5318 0.965 LS treated
Diaphragm spec. force * (mN/mm−2) 142.2 ± 10.0 (16) 114.8 ± 7.9 (18) 116.4 ± 8.2 (16) 103.1 ± 8.3 (18) 0.01863 0.9985 0.6352 EL treated
Diaphragm Absolute Recovery (mN/mm−2) * 13.5 ± 2.2 (15) 7.9 ± 0.9 (17) 10.1 ± 1.0 (15) 8.5 ± 1.2 (16) 0.02681 0.5241 0.9773 EL treated
Diaphragm Relative Recovery (%) 31.7 ± 4.4 (15) 17.8 ± 1.5 (17) 21.8 ± 1.2 (15) 21.0 ± 2.0 (16) 0.00213 0.5442 0.6897 EL treated
EDL tet (mN/mm−2) * 443 ± 21 (18) 352 ± 19 (13) 420 ± 28 (16) 384 ± 34 (15) 0.09242 0.203 0.7521 EL treated
ecc1 (% tet) 63 ± 2 (17) 55 ± 6 (12) 62 ± 4 (14) 59 ± 5 (14) 0.52856 0.4953 0.8805 EL treated
ecc2 (% tet) * 30 ± 3 (17) 21 ± 5 (12) 28 ± 4 (14) 30 ± 5 (13) 0.41442 0.5474 0.3446 LS treated
ecc5 (% tet) 10 ± 1 (17) 5 ± 1 (12) 8 ± 2 (13) 12 ± 3 (13) 0.13579 0.648 0.068 LS treated
ecc10 (% tet) 4 ± 1 (17) 2 ± 1 (12) 3 ± 1 (13) 6 ± 2 (12) 0.15307 0.6245 0.0729 LS treated
Post-rest ecc 11 (% tet) 8 ± 1 (15) 3 ± 1 (10) 7 ± 2 (13) 8 ± 2 (11) 0.1744 0.3851 0.1653 LS treated
((ecc11 - ecc10) / ecc10) x 100% (% ecc10) * 128 ± 17 (15) 107 ± 14 (10) 130 ± 16 (13) 153 ± 37 (11) 0.59542 0.823 0.3847 LS treated
Quad IgG (% CSA) * 0.6 ± 0.1 (18) 9.7 ± 1.0 (18) 8.9 ± 0.9 (17) 9.9 ± 1.5 (18) < .0001 0.8912 0.9991 EL treated
Heart IgG (% CSA) * 0.1 ± 0.03 (18) 2.7 ± 0.4 (18) 1.7 ± 0.5 (16) 1.3 ± 0.3 (18) < .0001 0.0701 0.0059 LS treated
Dia IgG (% CSA) * 0.5 ± 0.1 (18) 14.5 ± 0.6 (18) 11.8 ± 0.8 (17) 10.8 ± 0.8 (18) < .0001 0.0117 0.0003 LS treated
Abd IgG (% CSA) * 0.5 ± 0.1 (18) 8.8 ± 0.7 (18) 8.3 ± 1.6 (17) 6.3 ± 0.6 (18) < .0001 0.9717 0.1225 LS treated
*

indicates independent parameters used for the stochastic analyses

$

indicates ANOVA P-values calculated without a C57BL/10 wild-type control group

Measurements for 26 parameters from untreated het, LS treated and EL treated groups, compared with control C57 wild-type mice. ANOVA and Dunnett post-hoc P-values are shown for each parameter. The group with the closest value to wild-type or the best value if wild-type was not included (for MRI) is bolded and listed in the last column. P-values of < 0.05 are underlined.