Skip to main content
. 2017 Jun 27;6:e26030. doi: 10.7554/eLife.26030

Figure 4. Meta-analyses of each effect.

Figure 4.

Effect size and 95% confidence interval are presented for Ward et al. (2010), this replication study (RP:CB), and a random effects meta-analysis of those two effects. Sample sizes used in Ward et al. (2010) and this replication attempt are reported under the study name. Random effects meta-analysis of AML patient samples with an IDH1 mutation compared to a constant representing the 2HG/glutamate threshold between IDH mutant and wild-type IDH samples detected in the study (original: 0.01; replication: 0.0024) (meta-analysis p=0.114), AML patient samples with an IDH2 mutation compared to the threshold constant (meta-analysis p=1.12×10−6), and AML patient samples with an IDH1 or IDH2 mutation compared to the threshold constant (meta-analysis p=5.73×10−9). Additional details for these meta-analyses can be found at https://osf.io/4m3n8/.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26030.007