Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Calculation of Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC).

(A) Contingency matrix illustrating our usage of true negatives (TN), false positives (FP), false negatives (FN) and true positives (TP). (B) Mathematical definition of the MCC.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline demographics.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Detectability in the ADNI dataset of the 18 proteins highlighted by Ray et al. (2007).

Of the 18 proteins in the signature highlighted by Ray and colleagues [9], three were below the detection limits of the ADNI assay, 11 were considered detectable by ADNI and four were not assessed. Protein abbreviations are defined in Table S2.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Table 2.

Accuracy of the analytes that passed entropy filtering in classifying control and MCI progressor samples.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Figure 3.

APOE plasma concentration as a function of APOE genotype.

APOE concentration shows a decreasing trend from ‘protective’ (ε2) to ‘at risk’ (ε4) genotypes that is independent of clinical diagnosis. Plots illustrate APOE log10 plasma concentrations as a function of APOE genotype when considering samples classified at baseline as (A) control (n = 54), (B) MCI (n = 396) and (C) AD (n = 112). Plot (D) illustrates the trend when baseline diagnosis is not considered. 2/3 – APOE-ε2/ε3; 2/4 – APOE-ε2/ε4; 3/3 - APOE-ε3/ε3; 3/4 - APOE-ε3/ε4; 4/4 - APOE-ε4/ε4. Statistically significant (p<0.05) difference when compared to a2/3, b2/4, c3/3, d3/4. Statistical tests were not conducted on sample sets of n<4.

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Table 3.

Feature set selection of 11-analyte signatures to discriminate control and MCI progressor samples.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Accuracy of analyte signatures in classifying controls and MCI progressors.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Minimal meta-feature set selection of differences in analyte abundances to discriminate Control and MCI Progressor samples.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Accuracy of meta-feature signatures involving differences in analyte abundances in classifying controls and MCI progressors.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Accuracy of the analytes that passed entropy filtering in classifying control and AD samples.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Validation of proposed signatures on data collected at 12 month follow-up.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Table 9.

Feature set selection of signatures to discriminate control and MCI progressor samples based on longitudinal change.

More »

Table 9 Expand