Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 9;25(9):4487–4500. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.16536

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Enriched FABP5 revealed severe prognosis in LGGs. A, Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis for LGGs classified by IDH and 1p/19q status (P = .0019, with log‐rank test). B‐D, Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis for FABP5 expression in LGGs by using patient samples from our institution, TCGA and CGGA databases (B: P = .0018, C‐D: P < .0001, with log‐rank test). E‐H, Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis for FABP5 expression combined with IDH or 1p/19q status in LGGs by using patient samples from our institution and CGGA database (E: FABP5 combined with IDH mutation in LGG samples from our institution, P = .0001; F: FABP5 combined with 1p/19q co‐deletion in LGG samples from our institution, P = .0119; G: FABP5 combined with IDH mutation in LGG samples from CGGA database, P = .0297; H: FABP5 combined with 1p/19q co‐deletion in LGG samples from CGGA database, P = .0415; with log‐rank test. I‐J, Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis for FABP5 expression in primary I, or recurrent,J LGGs by using CGGA database (I: P = .0415, J: P = .0415, with log‐rank test). K‐L, Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis for FABP5 expression in grade II K, or grade III L, LGGs by using CGGA database (K: P = .2119, L: P < .0001, with log‐rank test)