Ection (FDR 0.05). We further analyzed the 68 person metabolites in these two
Ection (FDR 0.05). We further analyzed the 68 person metabolites in these two modules (red and brown) by testing their person associations with all the 3 BMI trajectory groups. Multinomial logistic regression models were fitted for the three trajectory groups (earlyOWO and late-OWO vs. NW) on each and every on the 68 metabolites, respectively. Figure three is really a forest plot showing the adjusted odds ratios with 95 self-assurance intervals for the top rated metabolites (FDR 0.05 for either in the two comparisons), although Supplementary Table S3 lists the model benefits for all 68 candidate metabolites. After PSB-603 custom synthesis accounting for many testing, only 2 metabolites were substantial for the comparison in between late-OWO and NW, but 27 metabolites showed up to be significant when comparing early-OWO with NW. As illustrated in the three panels of Figure three, these 27 metabolites were all either TAGs, DAGs, or CEs. Among them, TAGs and DAGs had been negatively related with BMI (odds ratio 1) although CEs were correlated with larger BMI (odds ratio 1). Results for every single with the 376 metabolites are supplied in Supplementary Table S4.Table 2. Longitudinal trajectory evaluation: Associations of cord metabolite modules (as defined according to correlation in between metabolite pairs) with kid BMI trajectory groups (early-OWO and late-OWO as in comparison with NW) from multinomial logistic regression model outcomes. Metabolite Module red brown black green yellow blue turquoiseaEarly-OWO vs. NW Odds Ratio (95 CI) 0.95 (0.91, 0.99) 0.96 (0.93, 0.99) 0.97 (0.93, 1.01) 1.02 (0.99, 1.06) 1.02 (0.98, 1.06) 1.00 (0.98, 1.02) 1.00 (0.98, 1.02) p-Value 0.006 0.014 0.163 0.201 0.275 0.924 0.829 FDRa, bLate-OWO vs. NW Odds Ratio (95 CI) 0.96 (0.92, 1.00) 0.96 (0.93, 1.00) 0.96 (0.92, 1.00) 1.01 (0.98, 1.05) 1.00 (0.97, 1.05) 1.01 (0.98, 1.03) 1.01 (0.98, 1.03)bp-Value 0.045 0.038 0.069 0.481 0.808 0.520 0.FDR b 0.159 0.159 0.161 0.728 0.808 0.728 0.0.043 0.049 0.352 0.352 0.386 0.924 0.Rows (metabolite modules) are ordered according to FDR of early-OWO vs. NW comparison. across all 7 metabolite modules.FDR accounts for multiple hypothesis testing2.3. Longitudinal Trajectory Evaluation: Sensitivity Evaluation We carried out sensitivity analysis to discover irrespective of whether metabolites’ effects differed by sex. Supplementary Figure S2 shows the impact size of each in the 376 metabolites for females and males, respectively. The heatmap was not masked by the p-value or FDR on the metabolite-by-sex ML-SA1 Formula interaction term since fewer than 10 metabolites had a significant interaction term (p 0.05) for any on the 3 comparisons inside the multinomial logistic regression model, and they had been no longer important just after correction for various testing. Supplementary Table S5 shows the association results among every of your seven metabolite modules plus the BMI trajectories (early-OWO and late-OWO compared with NW) along with the interaction term p-value and FDR. No metabolite modules appeared to possess significant effects immediately after multiple testing correction. On the other hand, two modules have been marginally significant (likelihood ratio test LRT p 0.05) and they were the brown and red modules which were constant with all the major analyses. The 68 metabolites inside the two modules have been further analyzed individually. Supplementary Table S6 shows the multinomial logistic regression model outcomes for every of the 68 metabolites in addition to their interaction term p-values and FDR. Only one metabolite had a marginally considerable interaction term (p 0.05).
