Skip to main content
. 2022 May 28;12:8979. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-12955-2

Table 3.

Clinical numerical variables showing differences between the evaluated comparisons.

Variable CR + PR vs NR CR vs NR PR vs NR CR vs PR
p-value Log2FC p-value Log2FC p-value Log2FC p-value Log2FC
IGF1 diagnosis 0.035 − 0.33 0.007 − 0.47 0.722 − 0.16 0.081 − 0.31
IGF1 index diagnosis 0.051 − 0.41 0.086 − 0.39 0.063 − 0.43 0.838 0.04
GH diagnosis 0.590 1.04 0.134 0.94 0.429 1.17 0.134 − 0.22
GH after OGTT 0.622 1.27 0.728 1.29 0.633 1.25 0.941 0.03
BMI diagnosis 0.094 − 0.13 0.044 − 0.17 0.452 − 0.07 0.316 − 0.10
Maximum diameter 0.178 − 0.27 0.092 − 0.35 0.532 − 0.16 0.708 − 0.19
Age diagnosis 0.197 0.14 0.272 0.13 0.802 − 0.03 0.276 0.16

The clinical numerical variables that were tested: IGF1 levels measured at diagnosis in each center, IGF1 index at diagnosis, GH levels measured at diagnosis in each center, GH levels measured after a 75 g oral glucose load (OGTT), BMI (Body Mass Index) at diagnosis, maximum tumor diameter in the MRI measured in each center and the age of the patient at diagnosis. T-test or Wilcoxon-test p-values are shown. Statistically significant values (p-value < 0.05) are reported in bold, and p-value < 0.1 in italic Log2FC: Log2 Fold Change.