Skip to main content
. 2013 Aug 15;21(6):430–438. doi: 10.1111/jvh.12161

Table 2.

Median scores and diagnostic performance of ELF and TE according to METAVIR fibrosis stage

ELF score (n = 182)
TE (kPa) (n = 182)
Fibrosis stage Median (IQR) AUROC (95% CI) Adjusted AUROC Median (IQR) AUROC (95% CI) Adjusted AUROC P value*
0 vs 1–4 8.21 (1.08) vs 9.39 (1.81) 0.77 (0.67–0.87) 0.81 5.55 (2.08) vs 8.50 (5.93) 0.86 (0.78–0.94) 0.90 0.09
0,1 vs 2–4 8.35 (1.13) vs 9.82 (1.53) 0.82 (0.76–0.88) 0.86 6.30 (2.47) vs 9.80 (6.43) 0.86 (0.80–0.91) 0.89 0.34
0–2 vs 3,4 8.75 (1.35) vs 10.06 (1.83) 0.80 (0.73–0.87) 0.83 6.90 (2.60) vs 13.00 (11.10) 0.90 (0.85–0.95) 0.94 <0.01
0–3 vs 4 9.01 (1.61) vs 10.60 (2.16) 0.83 (0.76–0.90) 0.86 7.60 (2.93) vs 16.15 (14.77) 0.95 (0.91–0.98) 0.96 <0.01

IQR, interquartile range; AUROC, area under receiver operator characteristic curve; CI, confidence interval.

*

Significance of comparison of observed ELF and TE AUROC values.