Figure 2.

Box plots showing significantly higher APP/Aβ- (A) and Aβ₄₂-ir (B) plaque loads, as well as Aβ₄₂:APP/Aβ (C) plaque load ratio in the ML of DS compared to HC cases (Kruskal–Wallis, p < 0.01), while Aβ₄₂-ir plaque load (B; Kruskal–Wallis, p = 0.01) and Aβ₄₂:APP/Aβ plaque load ratio (C; Kruskal–Wallis, p = 0.04) were significantly greater in DS compared to AD. Adjusting for age and gender revealed a greater ML Aβ₄₂ plaque load in DS compared to HC and AD (E; ANCOVA, p = 0.001), with no difference in APP/Aβ (D) plaque load and Aβ₄₂:APP/Aβ (F) ratio between groups (ANCOVA, p > 0.01). ANCOVA, analysis of covariance. * denotes significance between groups.