Table 3.
Comparison of ARMS and SABER/MassARRAY methods in detecting L858R EGFR mutations from ctDNA.
| L858R ARMS vs. Tissue | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ARMS | Tissue | ||
| Negative | Positive | ||
| Negative |
5738.3% RT
90.0% CT 23.4% GT |
1161.7% RT
50.9% CT 37.7% GT |
|
| Positive |
06.7% RT
10.0% CT 2.6% GT |
993.3% RT
49.1% CT 36.4% GT |
|
| Sensitivity: 45% | Specificity: 100% | PPV: 100% | NPV: 83.8% |
| SABER/MassARRAY vs. Tissue | |||
| SABER/MassARRAY | Tissue | ||
| Negative | Positive | ||
| Negative |
5138.3% RT
90.0% CT 23.4% GT |
1061.7% RT
50.9% CT 37.7% GT |
|
| Positive |
06.7% RT
10.0% CT 2.6% GT |
993.3% RT
49.1% CT 36.4% GT |
|
| Sensitivity: 47.4% | Specificity: 100% | PPV: 100% | NPV: 83.6% |
Tissue EGFR was used as the standard reference. PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value.Tissue EGFR was used as the standard reference. PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value.