Table 4.

Student’s t-test analysis of tear proteome from patients diagnosed with pterygium versus control

Gene name	Protein	p-value	FDR 5%	FDR 1%	FWER	Control average LFQ log transformed	Pterygium average LFQ log transformed	SE of difference
KRT13	Keratin, type I cytoskeletal 13	1.16E−04	Y	N	Y	25.1	29.1	0.7
KRT14	Keratin, type I cytoskeletal 14	3.27E−04	Y	N	N	25.1	28.4	0.7
RPL11	60S ribosomal protein L11	1.76E−03	N	N	N	20.0	22.3	0.3
KRT5	Keratin, type II cytoskeletal 5	3.60E−03	N	N	N	26.7	29.3	0.7
UPK3BL; POLR2J3	Uroplakin-3b-like protein	6.69E−03	N	N	N	22.9	24.6	0.5
KRT6B	Keratin, type II cytoskeletal 6B	8.21E−03	N	N	N	25.7	27.9	0.7
S100A8	Protein S100-A8	8.43E−03	N	N	N	22.4	25.0	0.8
YWHAQ	14–3-3 protein theta	8.43E−03	N	N	N	21.1	22.9	0.4
ST13; ST13P4	Hsc70-interacting protein; Putative protein FAM10A4	1.12E−02	N	N	N	22.1	22.6	0.1
FLG2	Filaggrin-2	1.18E−02	N	N	N	20.7	24.6	1.2
S100A6	Protein S100-A6	1.53E−02	N	N	N	23.5	26.1	0.9
KRT4	Keratin, type II cytoskeletal 4	1.93E−02	N	N	N	25.4	27.6	0.8
HSPA8	Heat shock cognate 71 kDa protein	2.45E−02	N	N	N	22.0	23.7	0.6
MYL6; MYL6B	Myosin light polypeptide 6; Myosin light chain 6B	2.49E−02	N	N	N	22.1	23.6	0.6
ANXA2; ANXA2P2	Annexin A2; Annexin; Putative annexin A2-like protein	2.79E−02	N	N	N	25.1	26.6	0.6
UBC§	Polyubiquitin-C	3.26E−02	N	N	N	22.2	24.7	1.1
IGHV5-10–1	Immunoglobulin heavy variable 5–10-1	3.41E−02	N	N	N	21.9	23.1	0.5
CDC42	Cell division control protein 42 homolog	3.88E−02	N	N	N	21.1	22.1	0.4
YWHAZ	14–3-3 protein zeta/delta	4.12E−02	N	N	N	24.7	26.4	0.7
P4HB	Protein disulfide-isomerase	4.87E−02	N	N	N	21.9	23.0	0.5

Proteins with increased abundance in pterygium in comparison with controls are shown

FDR: false discovery rate. FEWR: family-wise error rate (Holm-Sidak method). Y: yes, still significant after multiple comparisons correction. N: no, not significant after multiple comparisons correction. § Ubiquitin cluster (UBC; UBB; RPS27A; UBA52). SE: standard error