Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 May 17.
Published in final edited form as: J Alzheimers Dis. 2018;62(4):1691–1702. doi: 10.3233/JAD-170840

Table 3.

CP FTP SUVR associated with SUVR in nearby ROI

Estimate SE t value p value Adj. p
(15 tests)
SUVR (pvc)
HC 0.177 0.018 9.760 <1015 <1014
AM −0.012 0.025 −0.465 0.643 >1.000
ER 0.021 0.032 0.667 0.506 >1.000
FF 0.019 0.019 1.001 0.319 >1.000
IT 0.020 0.020 1.032 0.304 >1.000
SUVR (non-pvc)
HC 0.439 0.033 13.346 <1015 <10−14
AM 0.163 0.039 4.193 <104 0.001
ER 0.111 0.038 2.950 0.004 0.056
FF 0.084 0.027 3.111 0.002 0.034
IT 0.078 0.029 2.685 0.008 0.122
SUVR (non-pvc, covarying cerebral WM SUVR)
HC 0.350 0.032 10.937 <1015 <1014
AM 0.041 0.036 1.155 0.250 >1.000
ER 0.021 0.038 0.552 0.582 >1.000
FF −0.013 0.023 −0.558 0.578 >1.000
IT −0.020 0.026 0.792 0.430 >1.000

CP, choroid plexus; HC, hippocampus; HC residuals, residualized hippocampus; AM, amygdala; ER, entorhinal; FF, fusiform; IT, inferior temporal; SE, standard error; Adj. p, p values adjusted for multiple comparison using the Bonferroni method; SUVR, standardized uptake value ratio; pvc, partial volume correction using geometric transfer matrix method; WM, white matter. NOTE: Cerebellar cortex was used as reference for all SUVR shown. Separate multiple linear regression models were run for each region, all models covarying for race, age, sex, PiB DVR, and education. Bold values indicate significant association between FTP measurements in the CP and nearby ROI (p < 0.05).