Review



cox proportional hazards regression model  (SAS institute)


Bioz Verified Symbol SAS institute is a verified supplier  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 90
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    SAS institute cox proportional hazards regression model
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Model, supplied by SAS institute, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+model/pm38884900-48-15-25
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression model - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars

    Images

    Related Articles

    other:

    Article Title: Trastuzumab deruxtecan versus treatment of physician's choice in previously treated Asian patients with HER2-low unresectable/metastatic breast cancer: subgroup analysis of the DESTINY-Breast04 study.
    Article Snippet: HRs estimates for PFS and OS, and corresponding two-sided 95% CIs were determined using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4.

    Article Title: Dabigatran vs. Aspirin for Secondary Prevention After Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source ― Japanese Subanalysis of the RE-SPECT ESUS Randomized Controlled Trial ―
    Article Snippet: A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used for the analysis of outcomes, adjusting for age, renal impairment, and transient ischemic attack or stroke prior to the index stroke (SAS version 9.4; SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).

    Article Title: Influence of Clonal Plasma Cell Contamination of Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Autografts on Progression and Survival in Multiple Myeloma Patients After Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation in Long-term Observation.
    Article Snippet: A. Waszczuk-Gajda*, M. Feliksbrot-Bratosiewicz, M. Król, E. Snarski, J. Drozd-Sokołowska, P. Biecek, M. Król, Z. Lewandowski, J. Peradzy nska, W.W. Jędrzejczak, and J. Dwilewicz-Trojaczek Department of Hematology, Oncology and Internal Medicine, Warsaw Medical University, Warsaw, Poland; Faculty of Mathematics, Informatics, and Mechanics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland; and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Article Title: Implementing risk stratification to the treatment of adolescent substance use among youth involved in the juvenile justice system: protocol of a hybrid type I trial
    Article Snippet: We also will explore analyzing substance use as time-to-event data using a Cox proportional hazards regression model with the SAS PHREG procedure with censoring if loss to follow-up occurs.

    Article Title: Sustained reduction of catheter-associated bloodstream infections with enhancement of catheter bundle by chlorhexidine dressings over 11 years
    Article Snippet: We used a Cox proportional hazards regression model (SAS 9.3 PROC PHREG), with catheter-days representing the time factor and CABSI as the event of interest.

    Article Title: miR-101, miR-548b, miR-554, and miR-1202 are reliable prognosis predictors of the miRNAs associated with cancer immunity in primary central nervous system lymphoma
    Article Snippet: The statistical data were determined with the Cox proportional hazards regression model using the JMP built-in modules (SAS Institute Inc., Tokyo, Japan), as described [ ].

    Article Title: INITIATING HCV TREATMENT WITH DIRECT ACTING AGENTS IN OPIOID AGONIST TREATMENT: WHEN TO START FOR PEOPLE CO-INFECTED WITH HIV?
    Article Snippet: We fit a Cox proportional hazards regression model to obtain the adjusted survival probabilities for covariates, using the “DIRADJ” option of the “PHREG” procedure in SAS.

    Software:

    Article Title: The bidirectional relationship between anxiety, depression, and lower urinary track symptoms: A nationwide population-based cohort study.
    Article Snippet: Accepted Manuscript The bidirectional relationship between anxiety, depression, and lower urinary track symptoms: A nationwide population-based cohort study Charles Lung-Cheng Huang, Ming-Ping Wu, Chung-Han Ho, JhiJoung Wang PII: S0022-3999(17)30823-1 DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.07.008 Reference: PSR 9377 To appear in: Journal of Psychosomatic Research Received date: 6 July 2017 Revised date: 15 July 2017 Accepted date: 16 July 2017 Please cite this article as: Charles Lung-Cheng Huang, Ming-Ping Wu, Chung-Han Ho, Jhi-Joung Wang , The bidirectional relationship between anxiety, depression, and lower urinary track symptoms: A nationwide population-based cohort study, Journal of Psychosomatic Research (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.07.008 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form.



    Similar Products

    power calculation platform for proportional hazards regression (cox model)  (STATA Corporation)
    90
    STATA Corporation power calculation platform for proportional hazards regression (cox model)
    Power Calculation Platform For Proportional Hazards Regression (Cox Model), supplied by STATA Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/power+calculation+platform+for+proportional+hazards+regression++cox+model+/pmc12196044-96-7-14
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    power calculation platform for proportional hazards regression (cox model) - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazards regression models v15.1  (STATA Corporation)
    90
    STATA Corporation cox proportional hazards regression models v15.1
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Models V15.1, supplied by STATA Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/v15+1/pm40404275-63-38-50
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression models v15.1 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox univariable proportional-hazards regression model analysis  (RStudio)
    90
    RStudio cox univariable proportional-hazards regression model analysis
    Cox Univariable Proportional Hazards Regression Model Analysis, supplied by RStudio, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazard++coxph++regression/pm40163246-52-0-18
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox univariable proportional-hazards regression model analysis - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazards regression model  (MedCalc Software Ltd)
    90
    MedCalc Software Ltd cox proportional hazards regression model
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Model, supplied by MedCalc Software Ltd, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+model/pm39849644-83-7-13
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression model - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazards regression model graphpad prism 5  (GraphPad Software Inc)
    90
    GraphPad Software Inc cox proportional hazards regression model graphpad prism 5
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Model Graphpad Prism 5, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+model/pmc11446280-283-14-17
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression model graphpad prism 5 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox regression proportional hazard model  (GraphPad Software Inc)
    90
    GraphPad Software Inc cox regression proportional hazard model
    A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using <t>Cox</t> <t>regression</t> <t>proportional</t> <t>hazard</t> <t>model.</t> GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.
    Cox Regression Proportional Hazard Model, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+model/pmc11405526-128-17-22
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox regression proportional hazard model - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazard regression models  (STATA Corporation)
    99
    STATA Corporation cox proportional hazard regression models
    A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using <t>Cox</t> <t>regression</t> <t>proportional</t> <t>hazard</t> <t>model.</t> GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.
    Cox Proportional Hazard Regression Models, supplied by STATA Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/STATA+1%2E0/pm39247984-35-30-62
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazard regression models - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    99/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazards regression models graphpad prism 10.2.1  (GraphPad Software Inc)
    90
    GraphPad Software Inc cox proportional hazards regression models graphpad prism 10.2.1
    A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using <t>Cox</t> <t>regression</t> <t>proportional</t> <t>hazard</t> <t>model.</t> GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Models Graphpad Prism 10.2.1, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+models+graphpad+prism+10+2+1/pm38810729-64-14-14
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression models graphpad prism 10.2.1 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazards regression model  (SAS institute)
    90
    SAS institute cox proportional hazards regression model
    A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using <t>Cox</t> <t>regression</t> <t>proportional</t> <t>hazard</t> <t>model.</t> GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Model, supplied by SAS institute, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+model/pm38884900-48-15-25
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression model - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    cox proportional hazards regression model  (STATA Corporation)
    90
    STATA Corporation cox proportional hazards regression model
    A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using <t>Cox</t> <t>regression</t> <t>proportional</t> <t>hazard</t> <t>model.</t> GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.
    Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Model, supplied by STATA Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/cox+proportional+hazards+regression+model/cox+proportional+hazards+model/pm38555323-38-11-22
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cox proportional hazards regression model - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using Cox regression proportional hazard model. GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.

    Journal: Cell Death Discovery

    Article Title: Neural stem cells derived from α-synuclein-knockdown iPS cells alleviate Parkinson’s disease

    doi: 10.1038/s41420-024-02176-z

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A Schematic illustration of the behavior analysis protocol. At the age of 5 months, six training sessions were conducted for SNCA A53T transgenic mice over 2 weeks. Following the last training, mice were transplanted with NSCs or NSC-shSNCA cells. In a control group (mock), mice were injected with normal saline. NSCs and NSC-shSNCA cells were assessed for their therapeutic effects by B beam walking (mock vs NSC: week 15 to week 13, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 7, P < 0.01, week 5 and 9 to 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: week 13, P < 0.05, week 15, P < 0.001), C rotarod (mock vs NSC: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 5 to week 15, P < 0.001; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), D total traveled distance (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: NS; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), E locomotion time (mock vs NSC: week 13, P < 0.01, week 15, P < 0.05; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS), and F rest time (mock vs NSC: week 13 and 15, P < 0.01; mock vs NSC-shSNCA: week 15, P < 0.01; NSC vs NSC-shSNCA: NS). The behavioral assessment was conducted 1 day (week 0) before transplantation and every 7 days thereafter for 22 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values ( B – F ). Behavioral data were compared by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for time and treatment effects followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test (corrected for multiple comparisons). G Overall survival curves for transplanted mice in the behavior tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the log-rank test for group comparison. Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using Cox regression proportional hazard model. GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05. NS stands for not statistically significant.

    Article Snippet: Variables with a significant P -value in the univariate analysis were exposed to a multivariate analysis using Cox regression proportional hazard model. GraphPad Prism 5.01 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for analysis with a significance level of P < 0.05.

    Techniques: Transgenic Assay, Control, Injection, Saline, Transplantation Assay, Comparison