In multivariable analysis, Beclin-1 immunolabeling had what P-values for primary tumors and for combined primary and recurrent tumors?

In multivariable analysis, Beclin-1 immunolabeling had what P-values for primary tumors and for combined primary and recurrent tumors?

• A. P = .041 for primary; P = .016 for combined
• B. P = .016 for primary; P = .041 for combined
• C. P = .041 for primary; P = .032 for combined
• D. P = .050 for primary; P = .010 for combined

Answer: (A)

P-values in multivariable analysis tell you whether Beclin-1 immunolabeling is independently associated with the outcome after adjusting for other factors in the model. A value below 0.05 means the observed association is unlikely to be due to chance. Here, Beclin-1 shows a P-value of 0.041 for primary tumors, which is statistically significant, indicating an independent association in that group. When you consider both primary and recurrent tumors together, the P-value is 0.016, which is even more significant, suggesting a robust independent association across the combined dataset. The smaller P-value in the combined analysis can reflect a larger or more consistent effect when the broader group is analyzed. If a P-value were above 0.05, it would not be considered statistically significant in that model.

P-values in multivariable analysis tell you whether Beclin-1 immunolabeling is independently associated with the outcome after adjusting for other factors in the model. A value below 0.05 means the observed association is unlikely to be due to chance.

Here, Beclin-1 shows a P-value of 0.041 for primary tumors, which is statistically significant, indicating an independent association in that group. When you consider both primary and recurrent tumors together, the P-value is 0.016, which is even more significant, suggesting a robust independent association across the combined dataset. The smaller P-value in the combined analysis can reflect a larger or more consistent effect when the broader group is analyzed. If a P-value were above 0.05, it would not be considered statistically significant in that model.