Table 2.
Diagnostic test performance of LAM-ELISA (groups A and B were defined as gold standard positives, Group C as negative controls, other groups with undefined TB status were excluded)
| Sensitivity % (95% CI) |
Specificity % (95% CI) |
Positive predictive value % (95% CI) |
Negative predictive value % (95% CI) |
Positive diagnostic likelihood ratio (95% CI) |
Negative diagnostic likelihood ratio (95% CI) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subgroup (n) | |||||||
| LAM positivity in at least one out of two urine samples | |||||||
|
All (151) |
50.7 (38.4–63.0) |
87.8 (78.7–94.0) |
77.8 (62.9–88.8) |
67.9 (58.2–76.7) |
4.16 (2.23–7.78) |
0.56 (0.44–0.72) |
|
| Females (79) | 66.7 (47.2–82.7) |
83.7 (70.3–92.7) |
71.4 (51.3–86.8) |
80.4 (66.9–90.2) |
4.08 (2.06–8.08) |
0.40 (0.24–0.67) |
|
|
Males (72) |
38.5 (23.4–55.4) |
93.9 (79.8–99.3) |
88.2 (63.6–98.5) |
56.4 (42.3–69.7) |
6.35 (1.56–25.80) |
0.66 (0.50–0.85) |
|
| HIV-ve (64) | 21.1 (6.1–45.6) |
91.1 (78.8–97.5) |
50.0 (15.7–84.3) |
73.2 (59.7–84.2) |
2.37 (0.66–8.50) |
0.87 (0.68–1.11) |
|
| HIV+ve (87) | 62.0 (47.2–75.3) |
83.8 (68.0–93.8) |
83.8 (68.0–93.8) |
62.0 (47.2–75.3) |
3.82 (1.78–8.21) |
0.45 (0.31–0.66) |
-ve = negative | +ve = positive