Skip to main content

Table 3 Estimated stability of CSF immune mediators in children with autism, controlling for age and time-to-follow-up

From: Serum and cerebrospinal fluid immune mediators in children with autistic disorder: a longitudinal study

  Partial Spearman correlations for variables with <30% outside the LOD % <LOD for one or both samples Rate of sample 2 <LOD where sample 1 <LOD
n Partial correlation, 95% CI p value
Cytokines
 IL-1A 26 .33 (−.09–.64) .11 16 1/5 (20%)
 IL-IRA     87 21/25 (84%)
 IL-1B     87 23/27 (85%)
 IL-2     84 20/23 (87%)
 sIL-2RA     65 15/17 (88%)
 IL-3     52 15/15 (100%)
 IL-4     97 29/29 (100%)
 IL-5 28 .85 (.68–.93) <.0001 10 1/3 (33%)
 IL-6     94 28/29 (97%)
 IL-7     71 19/19 (100%)
 IL-9 31 .82 (.63–.91) <.0001 0 na
 IL-10     35 8/11 (73%)
 IL-12p40     61 13/19 (68%)
 IL-12p70     94 24/25 (96%)
 IL-13     100 30/31 (97%)
 IL-15 31 .80 (.61–.90) <.0001 0 na
 IL-17     94 27/28 (96%)
 IFNα2 30 .74 (.50–.87) <.0001 3 0/1 (0%)
 IFNγ     68 16/18 (89%)
 TNFα 31 .62 (.32–.80) .004 0 na
 TNFβ     65 12/16 (75%)
 TGFα 31 .84 (.67–.92) <.0001 0 na
Growth factors
 EGF     100 31/31 (100%)
 G-CSF 31 .53 (.19–.75) .003 0 na
 GM-CSF 31 .72 (.48–.86) <.0001 0 na
 VEGF     97 26/29 (90%)
 FGF-2     74 17/21 (81%)
 FLT-3L 31 .82 (.64–.91) <.0001 0 na
 sCD40L 27 .63 (.30–.82) .0008 13 1/4 (25%)
Chemokines
 CCL2 (MCP-1) 31 .64 (.35–.81) .0002 0 na
 CCL3 (MIP-1α)     58 9/13 (69%)
 CCL4 (MIP-1β)     48 12/12 (100%)
 CCL7 (MCP-3)     71 12/19 (63%)
 CCL11 (EOTAXIN)     97 26/30 (87%)
 CCL22 (MDC)     32 5/10 (50%)
 CXCL1 (GRO) 29 .53 (.18–.75) .004 6 0/2 (0%)
 CXCL8 (IL-8) 31 .51 (.17–.74) .004 0 na
 CXCL10 (IP-10) 31 .50 (.16–.73) .01 0 na
 CX3CL1 (FRACTALKINE) 31 .42 (.06–.68) .02 0 na
  1. Note: <LOD = below the lower limit of detection; na = not applicable. No restrictions were placed on time-to-follow-up for inclusion in these analyses. Mean age for sample 1 was 3.51 ± 0.95 years; mean time-to-follow-up was 2.44 ± 0.68 years. Spearman’s correlation was calculated where at least 70% of the sample had detectable values at both visits. Listwise deletion was used in correlation analyses; thus, individuals with out-of-range values were excluded. Age at sample 1 and time-to-follow-up were partialled out in correlation analyses. Variables with high rates of values outside the range of detection were analyzed as categorical; because of the small sample size and complete or quasi-complete separation, it was not possible to calculate reliable odds ratio estimates for these variables