Marieke van Rosmalen

Chapter 7 120 Table 7.4 Outcomes of correlation analysis between quantitative MRI parameters and clinical data Clinical parameter CIDP (n = 23) Δ FA Δ MD Δ AD Δ RD Δ T2 (ms) Δ FF (%) Categorical variables Sex (male/female) Mean D 0.01 0.00 0.04 -0.01 0.04 1.42 p 0.53 0.98 0.67 0.91 0.99 0.64 Receiving maintenance treatment (no/yes) Mean D -0.01 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.94 -0.96 p 0.52 0.16 0.20 0.17 0.56 0.66 Treatment response (poor/good) Mean D -0.01 0.06 0.07 0.05 2.16 -3.27 p 0.48 0.24 0.31 0.22 0.21 0.15 Continuous variables Age r -0.25 0.19 0.10 0.24 -0.11 -0.14 p 0.26 0.39 0.66 0.26 0.64 0.56 Disease duration r -0.50 -0.21 -0.33 -0.09 0.04 -0.41 p 0.02* 0.34 0.12 0.67 0.87 0.07 Time since last treatment r -0.04 0.23 0.21 0.22 -0.37 -0.09 p 0.85 0.30 0.33 0.31 0.10 0.69 Different clinical parameters are compared within patients with CIDP and MMN. For each quantitative MRI parameter mean differences and p values are calculated per categorical variable, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) with accompanying p values are calculated per continuous variable. All patients with MMN received maintenance treatment and had a good treatment response so these variables could not be compared within patients (cells with minus sign).