Table 3. Results of ROC Analysis for ADC and IVIM-Derived Parameters in Differentiation between RCCs and Fat Poor AMLs.
| Comparison | AUC (95% CI*) | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | ACC | Cut-Off Value | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ccRCC (n = 48) vs. fat poor AML (n = 12) | ||||||||
| ADC | 0.955 (0.868–0.992) | 85.4% (41/48) | 100% (12/12) | 100% (41/41) | 63.2% (12/19) | 88.3% (53/60) | > 1.39 | < 0.001 |
| D | 0.964 (0.880–0.995) | 93.8% (45/48) | 100% (12/12) | 100% (45/45) | 80% (12/15) | 95% (57/60) | > 0.97 | < 0.001 |
| D* | 0.668 (0.535–0.785) | 89.6% (43/48) | 50% (6/12) | 87.8% (43/49) | 54.5% (6/11) | 81.7% (49/60) | ≤ 38.84 | 0.103 |
| f | 0.506 (0.374–0.638) | 83.3% (40/48) | 33.3% (4/12) | 83.3% (40/48) | 33.3% (4/12) | 73.3% (44/60) | > 16.17 | 0.955 |
| Non-ccRCC (n = 23) vs. fat poor AML (n = 12) | ||||||||
| ADC | 0.634 (0.455–0.790) | 39.1% (9/23) | 100% (12/12) | 100% (9/9) | 46.2% (12/26) | 60% (21/35) | > 1.39 | 0.167 |
| D | 0.757 (0.583–0.886) | 56.5% (13/23) | 100% (12/12) | 100% (13/13) | 54.5% (12/22) | 71.4% (25/35) | > 0.97 | 0.002 |
| D* | 0.822 (0.656–0.930) | 87% (20/23) | 75% (9/12) | 87% (20/23) | 75% (9/12) | 82.9% (29/35) | ≤ 28.03 | < 0.001 |
| f | 0.783 (0.611–0.904) | 43.5% (10/23) | 100% (12/12) | 100% (10/10) | 48% (12/25) | 62.9% (22/35) | ≤ 13.61 | < 0.001 |
*Numbers in parentheses were 95% confidence intervals (CIs). ACC = accuracy, AML = angiomyolipoma, AUC = area under curve, ccRCC = clear cell RCC, non-ccRCC = papillary RCC and chromophobe RCC, NPV = negative predictive value, PPV = positive predictive value, RCC = renal cell carcinoma