Table 2.
Comparisons of lipid subclasses between CAP and controls
| Lipid Class | Lipid Sub-Class | Adduct | % of the total lipid signals | Fold change | Kruskal-Wallis adjusted p-value |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCAP/Control | NSCAP/ Control | SCAP/NSCAP | |||||
| Acylcarnitines | AcCa | +H | 0.06% | 0.48 | 0.75 | 0.63 | 0.078 |
| Fatty acids | SFA | -H | 54.96% | 0.93 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.14 |
| MUFA | -H | 1.35% | 2.13*** | 1.13** | 1.92 | < 0.0005 | |
| PUFA | -H | 0.85% | 2.50* | 1.33* | 1.92 | 0.004 | |
| Sphingolipids | Cer | +H | 2.16% | 1.09 | 1.41 | 0.81 | 0.95 |
| CerG1 | +H | 0.32% | 1.13 | 1.46 | 0.82 | 0.482 | |
| CerG2 | +H | 0.25% | 16.36*** | 13.51*** | 1.64 | < 0.0005 | |
| GM3 | +H | 0.01% | 0.98 | 1.16 | 0.88 | 0.125 | |
| SM | +H | 7.91% | 1.11 | 1.06 | 1.06 | 0.792 | |
| So | +H | 0.81% | 0.44*** | 0.65** | 0.67 | < 0.0005 | |
| Neutral lipids | DG | +NH4 | 1.88% | 1.96* | 1.96 | 0.94 | 0.031 |
| TG | +NH4 | 23.77% | 0.92 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 0.222 | |
| Phospholipids | PC | +CH3COO | 4.26% | 1.36 | 1.01 | 1.36 | 0.81 |
| PE | -H | 0.72% | 2.14*** | 1.43* | 1.60 | < 0.0005 | |
| PG | -H | 0.77% | 0.67* | 0.87 | 0.76 | 0.019 | |
| PI | -H | 0.45% | 1.65 | 0.90 | 1.84 | 0.110 | |
| PS | -H | 0.09% | 1.69 | 1.50 | 1.20 | 0.034 | |
| LPC | +H | 0.55% | 0.47** | 0.71 | 0.70 | 0.002 | |
| LPE | +H | 0.08% | 0.49* | 0.76 | 0.70 | 0.014 | |
| LPG | -H | 0.01% | 0.41*** | 0.72 | 0.58 | < 0.0005 | |
The relative abundances of lipid subclasses were calculated from the sum of lipid species that classified to the same subclass. The * depicts a statistically significant difference. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001