Table 2. Comparison of the proposed method with the models based on different methodologies and modalities.
| Method | Validation AUC | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Testing AUC | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R_T2 FLAIR | 0.88 (0.75, 0.95) | 76 (16/21) | 85 (22/26) | 0.81 (0.77, 0.85) | 80 (84/105) | 71 (163/229) |
| R_T1ce | 0.87 (0.74, 0.95) | 81 (17/21) | 77 (20/26) | 0.80 (0.75, 0.84) | 71 (75/105) | 79 (180/229) |
| R_T2 FLAIR + T1ce | 0.92 (0.80, 0.98) | 86 (18/21) | 85 (22/26) | 0.85 (0.81, 0.89) | 85 (89/105) | 76 (175/229) |
| D_T2 FLAIR | 0.86 (0.73, 0.95) | 81 (17/21) | 77 (20/26) | 0.79 (0.75, 0.84) | 75 (79/105) | 76 (175/229) |
| D_T1ce | 0.88 (0.75, 0.95) | 71 (15/21) | 88 (23/26) | 0.80 (0.76, 0.84) | 80 (84/105) | 69 (158/229) |
| D_T2 FLAIR + T1ce | 0.91 (0.79, 0.97) | 81 (17/21) | 88 (23/26) | 0.84 (0.80, 0.88) | 82 (86/105) | 77 (176/229) |
| R + D_ T2 FLAIR | 0.90 (0.77, 0.97) | 81 (17/21) | 85 (22/26) | 0.82 (0.78, 0.86) | 78 (82/105) | 76 (173/229) |
| R + D_T1ce | 0.90 (0.80, 0.98) | 86 (18/21) | 81 (21/26) | 0.82 (0.77, 0.86) | 81 (85/105) | 75 (172/229) |
| Proposed method | 0.94 (0.85, 0.99) | 86 (18/21) | 92 (24/26) | 0.88 (0.85, 0.92) | 88 (92/105) | 81 (186/229) |
Note. R_: Radiomics, D_: Deep learning, R + D_: Radiomics + Deep learning