Table 4: Significant ANCOVA Interactions for Between-Group Differences in Longitudinal Changes of Absolute and Relative White Matter Volumes

Brodmann’s Area Contrasts Absolute Volumesa Absolute VolumesControlled for Illness Durationb Relative Volumesa Relative Volumes Controlled for Illness Durationb
Frontal lobe
(4-6-8-9-10-11-12-24-25-32-44-45-46-47)
Schizophrenia vs. healthy subjects
Good-outcome vs. poor-outcome g×t F1, 38=5.24, p=0.028 (0.028) g×t F1, 45=4.07, p=0.0497 (0.0497) g×t F1, 38=4.81, p=0.035 (0.035)
g×t×BA F13, 585=2.46, p=0.003 (0.07) g×t×BA F13, 494=4.08, p=0.000002 (0.01) g×t×BA F13, 585=2.73, p=0.0009 (0.053) g×t×BA F13, 494=3.74, p=0.00001(0.016)
Temporal lobe
(20-21-22-27-28-34-35-36-37-38-41-42)
Schizophrenia vs. healthy subjects g×t×BA F11, 671=2.02, p=0.02 (0.12)
g×t×h×BA F11, 671=1.89, p=0.037 (0.13)
Good-outcome vs. poor-outcome g×t F1, 45=8.02, p=0.007 (0.007) g×t F1, 38=7.90, p=0.008 (0.008) g×t F1, 45=7.53, p=0.009 (0.009) g×t F1, 38=7.23, p=0.01 (0.01)
g×t×BA F11, 495=2.86, p=0.001 (0.04) g×t×BA F11, 418=2.70, p=0.002 (0.053) g×t×BA F11, 495=3.01, p=0.0007 (0.04) g×t×BA F11, 418=2.91, p=0.001 (0.049)
Parietal lobe
(1/2/3/5-7a-7b-23-26-29-30-31-39-40-43)
Schizophrenia vs. healthy subjects g×t×h×BA F10,610=2.09, p=0.02 (0.09)
Good-outcome vs. poor-outcome g×t F1, 45=4.11, p=0.048 (0.048) g×t F1, 38=4.63, p=0.038 (0.038)
g×t×BA F10, 450=2.15, p=0.02 (0.10) g×t×h F1, 38=4.07, p=0.051 (0.051)
g×t×h×BA F10, 450=2.82, p=0.002 (0.02) g×t×h×BA F10, 380=2.68, p=0.0036 (0.025)
Occipital lobe
(17-18-19)
Schizophrenia vs. healthy subjects
Good-outcome vs. poor-outcome g×t F1, 45=4.16, p=0.047 (0.047) g×t F1, 38=4.40, p=0.04 (0.04) g×t F1, 45=4.9, p=0.032 (0.032) g×t F1, 38=4.70, p=0.037 (0.037)
Cingulate gyrus
(23-24-25-26-29-30-31-32)
Schizophrenia vs. healthy subjects g × t F1, 61=3.79, p=0.056 (0.056)
Good-outcome vs. poor-outcome
Frontal (4-6-8-9-10-11-12-44-45-46-47) vs.
temporal (20-21-22-27-28-34-35-36-38-41-42) vs.
parietal (1/2/3/5-7a-7b-23-26-29-30-31-39-40-43)
Schizophrenia vs. healthy subjects
Good-outcome vs. poor-outcome g × t F1, 45=6.53, p=0.014 (0.014) g×t F1, 38=6.95, p=0.01 (0.01) g×t F1, 45=6.42, p=0.015 (0.015) g×t F1, 38=6.59, p=0.014 (0.014)
g×t×r×BA F20, 760=21.73, p=0.024 (0.10) g×t×r×BA F20, 900=2.08, p=0.004 (0.04) g×t×r×BA F20, 760=2.86, p=0.0003 (0.005)

Abbreviations: g×t – diagnostic group by scan time interaction, g×t×BA – diagnostic group by time by Brodmann’s area interaction, g×t×h×BA – diagnostic group by time by hemisphere by Brodmann’s area interaction, g×t×r×BA – diagnostic group by time by region by Brodmann’s area interaction, g×t×h×r×BA – diagnostic group by time by hemisphere by region by Brodmann’s area interaction.
Uncorrected p values are followed by Huynh-Feldt corrected p in parentheses. Interactions at trend level of significance (p<0.10) are in italics. Note that parietal areas 1, 2, 3, and 5 were combined in these analyses, hence 1/2/3/5.
a ANCOVA with subjects’ age and interscan interval as covariates (full sample)
b ANCOVA with subjects’ age, interscan interval and illness duration as covariates (subsample of schizophrenia patients)