Table 3

Comparison of angiogenic factors in patients with LA GVHD (inclusive of recurrent and de novo LA GVHD), classic acute GVHD, and chronic GVHD vs their respective controls

VariableLA GVHD cohort 1 (n = 55)LA GVHD controls (n = 50)P value
MeanSDMedianMinMaxMeanSDMedianMinMax
AREG 65.0 143.5 24.0 4.0 843.2 19.9 18.1 16.6 0.7 84.0 <.001 
EGF 53.7 52.2 38.0 0.9 215.6 52.0 46.6 47.8 0.9 216.4 .2 
AREG/EGF ratio 11.8 42.0 0.82 0.07 289.3 1.6 4.8 0.42 0.01 25.9 <.001 
VariableLA GVHD cohort 1 (n = 55)LA GVHD controls (n = 50)P value
MeanSDMedianMinMaxMeanSDMedianMinMax
AREG 65.0 143.5 24.0 4.0 843.2 19.9 18.1 16.6 0.7 84.0 <.001 
EGF 53.7 52.2 38.0 0.9 215.6 52.0 46.6 47.8 0.9 216.4 .2 
AREG/EGF ratio 11.8 42.0 0.82 0.07 289.3 1.6 4.8 0.42 0.01 25.9 <.001 

Both LA GVHD cohorts 1 (n = 55) and 2 (n = 37) were compared with LA GVHD controls (n = 50) via 2-sample t test of log-transformed values. Cohort 1, LA GVHD vs matched control comparison from national Chronic GVHD Consortium; cohort 2, validation cohort of patients with LA GVHD at onset from the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC). Acute GVHD, classic acute GVHD vs matched controls from MAGIC and Oregon Health & Science University. Chronic GVHD, chronic GVHD and matched control samples from Chronic GVHD Consortium. Bold indicates statistical significance.

SD, standard deviation.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal