Table 2.
Secondary analysis of various MRI-PDFF percentage thresholds for diagnosis of steatosis in the training and validation group with optimal BSC cut-offs and corresponding AUCs, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and total accuracy.
Training Group (n = 102) | Validation Group (n = 102) | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MRI- PDFF thres- hold |
BSC cut-off |
n | AUC* | SN | SP | PPV | NPV | TA | n | AUC* | SN | SP | PPV | NPV | TA |
≥4% | 0.0033 | 75 | 0.95 (0.91–0.99) | 0.91 (0.82–0.96) | 1.00 (0.87–1.00) | 1.00 (0.95–1.00) | 0.79 (0.62–0.91) | 0.93 (0.86–0.97) | 75 | 0.97 (0.94–1.00) | 0.85 (0.75–0.92) | 1.00 (0.87–1.00) | 1.00 (0.94–1.00) | 0.71 (0.54–0.85) | 0.89 (0.82–0.95) |
≥5% | 0.0038 | 70 | 0.98 (0.95–1.00) | 0.93 (0.84–0.98) | 0.97 (0.84–1.00) | 0.99 (0.92–1.00) | 0.86 (0.71–0.95) | 0.94 (0.88–0.98) | 70 | 0.95 (0.90–1.00) | 0.87 (0.77–0.94) | 0.91 (0.75–0.98) | 0.95 (0.87–0.99) | 0.76 (0.60–0.89) | 0.88 (0.80–0.94) |
≥6% | 0.0038 | 65 | 0.94 (0.90–0.99) | 0.94 (0.85–0.98) | 0.87 (0.71–0.96) | 0.92 (0.83–0.98) | 0.89 (0.74–0.97) | 0.91 (0.84–0.96) | 65 | 0.92 (0.86–0.98) | 0.88 (0.77–0.95) | 0.81 (0.65–0.92) | 0.89 (0.79–0.96) | 0.79 (0.63–0.90) | 0.85 (0.77–0.92) |
≥8% | 0.0056 | 56 | 0.90 (0.84–0.96) | 0.88 (0.76–0.95) | 0.80 (0.66–0.91) | 0.85 (0.73–0.93) | 0.84 (0.70–0.93) | 0.84 (0.76–0.91) | 57 | 0.90 (0.84–0.96) | 0.83 (0.70–0.91) | 0.82 (0.68–0.92) | 0.86 (0.73–0.94) | 0.79 (0.64–0.89) | 0.82 (0.74–0.89) |
95% confidence intervals presented in parenthesis.
Abbreviations for table: AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; BSC, backscatter coefficient (in 1/cm-sr); MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; n/a, not applicable; NPV, negative predictive value; PDFF, proton-density-fat-fraction; PPV, positive predictive value; SN, sensitivity; SP, specificity; TA, total accuracy.
All AUCs are reported with P <.000