Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 25;13:46. doi: 10.1186/s13048-020-00643-6

Table 4.

Comparison of diagnostic performance of tests

Test Sensitivity % Specificity % PPV% NPV% Area under the curve (95% confidence interval)
RMI1 63 (17/27) 93.8 (120/128) 68 (17/25) 92.3 (120/130) .844 (0.740–0.947)
RMI2 66.7 (18/27) 89.1 (114/128) 56.3 (18/32) 92.7 (114/123) .851 (0.762–0.940)
RMI3 63 (17/27) 90.6 (116/128) 58.6 (17/29) 92.1 (116/126) .841 (0.749–0.932)
RMI4 66.7 (18/27) 92.2 (118/128) 64.3 (18/28) 92.9 (118/127) .841 (0.744–0.938)
ROMA 59.3 (16/27) 93 (119/128) 64 (16/25) 91.5 (119/130) .886 (0.805–0.967)
HE4 37 (10/27) 96.9 (124/128) 71.4 (10/14) 87.9 (124/141) .798 (0.704–0.892)

Data represented as percentages at 95% confidence interval PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, RMI Risk of malignancy index, ROMA Risk Of Malignancy Algorithm, HE4 Human Epididymis Protein 4. Cut off for RMI1, RMI2, RMI3 was 200, for RMI4 was 450; for ROMA cut off for premenopausal was 11.4, for postmenopausal was 29.9; for HE4 cut off of 70 pmol/l was used