Table 3

Relative intensities of signaling proteins in FL compared with FH

Signaling proteinRelative signal intensity in FH (N = 22)
Relative signal intensity in FL, all grades (N = 36)
P*
MedianSDRangeMedianSDRange
Phospho Erk Thr202/Tyr204 4.11 3.09 0.96-10.46 15.83 23.19 2.28-100 < .001 
Erk, total 39.33 22.12 13.87-95.74 40.67 21.45 14.99-100 .56 
Phospho-Mek 1/2 Ser217/221 14.79 10.77 4.68-44.44 25.37 23.75 7.5-100 .003 
Mek 1/2, total 39.29 13.68 21.61-69.88 41.99 23.86 18.24-100 .58 
Phospho–Stat-6 Tyr641 3.44 3.34 0.58-12.06 6.24 18.28 1.25-100 .012 
Stat-6, total 17.54 19.38 4.95-100 19.53 18.94 3-95.11 .88 
Signaling proteinRelative signal intensity in FH (N = 22)
Relative signal intensity in FL, all grades (N = 36)
P*
MedianSDRangeMedianSDRange
Phospho Erk Thr202/Tyr204 4.11 3.09 0.96-10.46 15.83 23.19 2.28-100 < .001 
Erk, total 39.33 22.12 13.87-95.74 40.67 21.45 14.99-100 .56 
Phospho-Mek 1/2 Ser217/221 14.79 10.77 4.68-44.44 25.37 23.75 7.5-100 .003 
Mek 1/2, total 39.29 13.68 21.61-69.88 41.99 23.86 18.24-100 .58 
Phospho–Stat-6 Tyr641 3.44 3.34 0.58-12.06 6.24 18.28 1.25-100 .012 
Stat-6, total 17.54 19.38 4.95-100 19.53 18.94 3-95.11 .88 

RPMA of 36 samples of FL and 22 samples of FH, probed with antibodies for the proteins listed (“Methods”). Relative signal intensities representing protein content were generated using Microvigene imaging analysis softwear, normalized to total protein and scaled to the maximum value in the group. Standard deviations of the mean relative signal intensity and ranges are reported next to the median relative signal intensity for each protein.

*

The Mann-Whitney rank test was used to compare FL and FH with P values set at P = .01 for determination of significance, due to multiple comparisons.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal