Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neurobiol Aging. 2020 May 31;94:111–120. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2020.05.012

Table 4.

Annualized changes in [11C]PiB retention measures by APOE genotype class

Comparison APOE-ε3ε3 APOE-ε2+ APOE-ε4+ Test Statistic (df), p-value
All Participants
n 142 28 65
Change (SUVR/yr), mean (SD) 0.03(0.05) 0.04 (0.06) 0.05 (0.07) F: 1.74(2), p=0.178a
ε3ε3 vs ε2+ 0.03(0.05) 0.04 (0.06) p=0.481b
ε3ε3 vs ε4+ 0.03(0.05) 0.05 (0.07) p=0.103b
ε2+ vs ε4+ 0.04 (0.06) 0.05 (0.07) p=0.574b
Participants PiB+ at Baseline
n 52 4 44
Change (SUVR/yr), mean (SD) 0.05 (0.07) 0.11 (0.09) 0.05 (0.08)
Change (SUVR/yr), median (IQR) 0.06 (0.01–0.10) 0.08 (0.04–0.18) 0.06 (0.0–0.10) KW: 1.19 (2), p=0.551c
ε3ε3 vs ε4+ 0.06 (0.01–0.10) 0.06 (0.0–0.10) p=0.936d
Participants PiB- at Baseline
n 90 24 21
Change (SUVR/yr), mean (SD) 0.02 (0.04) 0.03 (0.04) 0.04 (0.06) F: 1.0 (2), 0.369a
Change (SUVR/yr), median (IQR) 0.02 (0.0–0.05) 0.02 (0.0–0.06) 0.04 (0.0–0.08)
ε3ε3 vs ε4+ 0.02 (0.04) 0.04 (0.06) p=0.340e
Incident PiB+ participants
n 30 3 7
Change (SUVR/yr), mean (SD) 0.06 (0.03) 0.09 (0.03) 0.09 (0.03)
Change (SUVR/yr), median (IQR) 0.06 (0.04–0.08) 0.10 (0.05–0.11) 0.09 (0.06–0.12) KW: 6.24(2), 0.044c
ε3ε3 vs ε4+ 0.06 (0.04–0.08) 0.09 (0.06–0.12) p=0.029d
a

p-value from one-way ANOVA

b

p-value from paired t-test

c

p-value from Kruskall-Wallis test

d

p-value from non-parametric Wilcoxon test

e

p-value from independent two sample t-test