buy HG-9-91-01 br Materials and Methods br

Materials and Methods
Results A total of 144 unique HLA buy HG-9-91-01 (74 Class I and 70 Class II, Table 1) were identified from a total of 82 participants. The stepwise linear discriminant analysis identified 6 alleles that yielded 84.1% correct classification of the 82 subjects to their respective groups. These results were robust. The leave-one-out classification rate for the original sample was 79.1% and for the 2 bootstrap analyses >80% (80.1% for bootstrap samples of N=100 and 81.2% for N=200). We also performed the same stepwise discriminant analysis in a gender-homogeneous sample for men only (N=79). The correct classification rate was 86.1% and the leave-one-out classification rate was 81.0%. The overall classification rate obtained by applying the procedure proposed by Sanchez (1974) (see Methods) was 82.3% (range: 78.1%–85.9%, N=10,000 permutations), which is way substantially and consistently above the expected chance rate of 50%. The alleles and associated statistics are given in Table 2 and details about the goodness of classification based on the results using the full GWI sample are presented in Table 3. It can be seen that the discriminant classification was highly statistically significant and effective, and that the classification was correct at a high level (>80%), was very similar with respect to sensitivity (0.848; 84.8%) and specificity (0.812; 81.2%), exceeded chance even by the most conservative Wilson\'s test (Table 3E), and yielded a ROC curve (Fig. 1) that was highly significant and considerably above chance (Table 3F). The analysis of frequencies of the 6 alleles (Table 4, A, B) pointed to a systematic protective effect in the control group and, by extension, lack of protection in the GWI group. This is evidenced by the fact that all allele frequencies were lower in the GWI group (Table 4A), as compared to the control group (t=−5.789, DF=5, P=0.002, paired t-test) and that all the odds ratios were less than one, i.e. negative ln(): ln()=−1.792±0.383 (mean±SEM), t=−4.671, DF=5, P=0.005, one-sample t-test against the null hypothesis that mean ln()=0). In addition, the percentage of participants with a given allele was systematically lower for all 6 alleles (Table 4B). This collective protective effect of the 6 alleles above was further corroborated by the results of the linear regression of overall symptom severity against the number of allele copies (Fig. 2) which revealed a strong and highly significant negative relation (t=−4.148, DF=80, P=0.000083, R2=0.177): We also performed a multiple linear regression analysis separately for each symptom domain. We found a highly significant effect of the number of copies of individual alleles on symptom severity of Pain (P=0.01, R2=0.199), Fatigue (P=0.006, R2=0.210), and Neurological-Cognitive-Mood (P=0.004, R2=0.225) symptoms; remarkably, all slopes (i.e. partial regression coefficients) of individual allele copies vs. symptom severity were negative in each regression model, indicating a consistent and robust effect. Finally, the regression analysis was not significant for skin (P=0.911), gastrointestinal (P=0.576), and respiratory (P=0.598) symptoms. Next, we analyzed our data with respect to the three databases (SF, MN, CDC) from the literature. Fig. 3 shows the mean frequencies across the 6 alleles as found in the 3 databases, our controls and the GWI group. It can be seen that the values for the 3 databases are similar, whereas the values for the GWI and control groups are lower and higher, respectively, than those of the databases. Next, we carried out a statistical analysis of these data by calculating the ln() for each allele between each database and control, and each database and GWI populations. This yielded 6 alleles×3 databases×2 groups=36 values. We assessed the main effects of Database and Group, and the Database×Group interactions by performing a univariate ANOVA. We found that the Group main effect was highly significant (Fig. 4; P=0.00019), whereas neither the Database main effect (P=0.911; data not shown) nor the Database×Group interaction (Fig. 5; P=0.934) were statistically significant (F-test in the ANOVA). These results document the significant difference between the control (increased) and GWI (decreased) mean allele frequencies, relative to the 3 databases, while positing the similarity among the 3 databases and the similarity of the group effect across these databases.