Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Dec 3;13(7):1337–1345.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.11.027

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

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure