Table 1.
Gene set enrichment analysis
| Size | MTM versus MTM | MTMhp versus MTM | Mesothelioma versus MTM | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ES | NES | NOM p‐val | FDR q‐val | ES | NES | NOM p‐val | FDR q‐val | ES | NES | NOM p‐val | FDR q‐val | ||
| Gordon up | 108 | 0.13 | 0.41 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.47 | 1.28 | 0.021 | 0.047 | 0.40 | 1.10 | 0.190 | 0.229 |
| Gordon down | 74 | 0.18 | 0.54 | 0.998 | 1.000 | 0.60 | 1.61 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.48 | 1.31 | 0.017 | 0.032 |
GSEA software was used to determine the enrichment of genes from an external data set representing up‐ or down‐regulated genes in human mesothelioma specimens, when compared to normal lung and pleural tissues. ES, enrichment score; NES, normalized enrichment score (bold); NOM p‐val, uncorrected p‐value; FDR q‐val, false discovery rate and multiple testing correction (q‐value).