Table 2.
Performance of the TAV models in the validation cohort.
| TAV model 1 (LC prevalence = 48 %) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diagnosis |
||||
| LC | No LC | Total | Sensitivity: 0.88 (95 % CI, 0.68–0.97) | |
| Predicted LC | 22 | 6 | 28 | Specificity: 0.71 (95 % CI, 0.48–0.89) |
| Predicted No LC | 3 | 15 | 18 | PPV: 0.79 (95 % CI, 0.65–0.88) |
| Total | 25 | 21 | 46 | NPV: 0.83 (95 % CI, 0.63–0.94) |
| TAV model 2 (LC prevalence = 5 %) | ||||
| Diagnosis | ||||
| LC | No LC | Total | Sensitivity: 0.80 (95 % CI, 0.65–0.91) | |
| Predicted LC | 33 | 22 | 55 | Specificity: 0.96 (95 % CI, 0.95–0.98) |
| Predicted No LC | 8 | 582 | 590 | PPV: 0.60 (95 % CI, 0.49–0.70) |
| Total | 41 | 604 | 645 | NPV: 0.99 (95 % CI, 0.98–0.99) |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; LC, lung cancer; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; TAV, telomere-associated variables.