Table 2:
Effects of Study Conditions on ln_s100A8/A9 over 12 months of Primary Treatment for Breast Cancer
| T1 ln_s100A8A9 mean(SD) | T2 ln_s100A8A9 mean(SD) | |
|---|---|---|
| CBT/RT | 8.2645(0.79549) | 8.0568(0.68626) |
| CBT | 8.1693(0.70810) | 7.9885(0.62950) |
| RT | 8.3671(0.87812) | 8.1304(0.74410) |
| HE | 7.6521(0.77544) | 7.7622(0.70167) |
| Statistic | Sig. | |
| CBT/RT v HE | F(1, 114)=4.500 | 0.036 |
| CBT v HE | F(1, 78)=3.789 | 0.055 |
| CBT v RT | F(1, 70)=0.000 | 0.997 |
| RT v HE | F(1, 73)=2.512 | 0.117 |
Note: In a post-hoc analysis, a univariate ANOVA was conducted comparing CBT/RT vs HE controls on raw s100A8/A9 values at 12 month follow-up controlling for baseline s100A8/A9 values, and found that while baseline s100A8/A9 values contributed marginally to 12 month values (F=3.05, p=0.083), treatment condition (CBT/RT vs HE) retained a nearly significant effect on s100A8/A9 (F=3.72, p=0.056). This suggests that baseline s100 A8/A9 differences in conditions may have contributed, in part, to the overall effects.