Skip to main content
Fig. 1 | Cell & Bioscience

Fig. 1

From: Integrating pathology, chromosomal instability and mutations for risk stratification in early-stage endometrioid endometrial carcinoma

Fig. 1

Comparison of CIN signatures among prognostic factors of histopathology. a Boxplot of CIN25 and CIN70 expression in Grade 1, Grade 2 and Grade 3 patients from TCGA. If the Levene test for homogeneity demonstrates unequal variances among these three groups, p values are calculated by Welch-corrected ANOVA with Games-Howell post hoc tests. b Forest plot comparing CIN25 expression in Grade 1 & 2 versus Grade 3 patients. c Boxplot of CIN25 and CIN70 expression in EEC and non-EEC patients from TCGA. d Forest plot comparing CIN25 expression in EEC versus non-EEC samples. e Forest plot comparing CIN25 expression in Stage I& II versus Stage III & IV patients. In (b), (d) and (e), an inverse variance (IV) fixed effects method is used to meta-analyze the data; squares (blue) represent standardized mean difference (SMD); square size is proportional to weights used in the analysis; bars (gray) represent 95% confidence intervals (CI); diamonds (yellow) represent overall SMD with associated 95% CI (lateral tips). f Boxplot of CIN25 and CIN70 expression in Stage IIIC samples with positive pelvic lymph nodes and positive aortic lymph nodes in the TCGA dataset. g Boxplot of CIN25 and CIN70 expression in Stage I and Grades 1 & 2 EEC samples with MI < 50% and MI > 50% from the TCGA dataset. h Pearson correlation between age and CIN25 or CIN70 expression in Stage I EEC patients with Grades 1 & 2 and MI < 50% from the TCGA dataset. i Same as (h) but utilizing samples in the GSE17025 dataset. j Boxplot of CIN25 and CIN70 expression in patients from (g) and (h) with age < 60 and > 60. P values presented in (c), (f), (g) and (j) are Mann–Whitney test calculations. P values: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, n.s. not significantly different

Back to article page