Table 4.
Models | EARLY (Day 1) | LATE (Day 3–5) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | n | AUROC (95% CI) | N | AUROC (95% CI) |
KCC | 174 | 0.552 (0.502,0.602) | 110 | 0.604 (0.555,0.654) |
ALFSG Index | 192 | 0.686 (0.624,0.747) | 124 | 0.711 (0.635,0.788) |
FABP1 | 198 | 0.710 (0.639,0.782) | 186 | 0.820 (0.760,0.881) |
KCC+FABP1 | 174 | 0.711 (0.635,0.787)1 | 110 | 0.797 (0.712,0.882)3,4 |
ALFSG Index + FABP1 | 192 | 0.766 (0.699,0.833)2 | 124 | 0.815 (0.736,0.894)5,6 |
FABP1>350 ng/ml | 198 | 0.626 (0.559,0.694) | 186 | 0.776 (0.715,0.836) |
KCC+FABP1>350 ng/ml | 174 | 0.651 (0.577,0.726)7 | 110 | 0.794 (0.719,0.869)9,10 |
ALFSG Index + FABP1>350 ng/ml | 192 | 0.720 (0.652,0.789)8 | 124 | 0.818 (0.746,0.890)11,12 |
ALFSG ~ Acute Liver Failure Study Group Index. AUROC ~ Area under the receiver operator curve. CI ~ Confidence intervals KCC; King’s College Criteria (Acetaminophen). FABP1; Liver-type Fatty acid binding protein.
Early Models (Delong method for comparison of AUROC statistics(25)):
FABP1+KCC vs. KCC: p < 0.0001
FABP1+ALFSG index vs. ALFSG index: p =0.0008
FABP1>350 ng/ml +KCC vs. KCC: p = 0.005
FABP1>350 ng/ml +ALFSG index vs. ALFSG index: p =0.077
Late Models: KCC
FABP1+KCC vs. KCC: p < 0.0001
For LATE model, only 110 patients had complete data to calculate the KCC. For those patients the AUROC of FABP1 alone (n=110) was 0.772 (0.677, 0.866).
FABP1>350 ng/ml +KCC vs. KCC: p < 0.0001
For LATE model, only 110 patients had complete data to calculate the KCC. For those patients the AUROC of FABP1>350 alone (n=110) was 0.760 (0.677, 0.843).
Late Models: ALFSG Index
FABP1+ALFSG index vs. ALFSG index: p =0.0012
For LATE model, only 124 patients had complete data to calculate the ALFSG Index. For those patients the AUROC of FABP1 alone (n=124) was 0.757 (0.668, 0.845).
FABP1>350 ng/ml +ALFSG index vs. ALFSG index: p =0.0048
For LATE model, only 124 patients had complete data to calculate the ALFSG Index. For those patients the AUROC of FABP>350 ng/ml alone (n=124) was 0.746 (0.669, 0.823).