Table 3.
RKF cut-off to be identified (mL/min/1.73 m2) | AUC | 95% CI | Predicted eRKF cut-off (mL/min/1.73 m2) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.960 | 0.929 to 0.990 | 1 | 97.8 | 38.5 |
2 | 91.2 | 84.6 | |||
3 | 81.0 | 100 | |||
2 | 0.915 | 0.865 to 0.964 | 2 | 94.3 | 59.3 |
3 | 85.4 | 77.8 | |||
4 | 75.6 | 88.9 | |||
3 | 0.899 | 0.849 to 0.949 | 3 | 92.2 | 66.0 |
4 | 82.5 | 76.6 | |||
5 | 68.9 | 89.4 | |||
4 | 0.893 | 0.842 to 0.943 | 4 | 90.5 | 69.7 |
5 | 78.6 | 84.8 | |||
6 | 54.8 | 92.4 | |||
5 | 0.891 | 0.839 to 0.942 | 5 | 82.9 | 77.5 |
6 | 64.3 | 92.5 | |||
7 | 41.4 | 100 |
ROC receiving operator characteristic, RKF residual kidney function, AUC area under the curve, CI confidence interval, eRKF estimated residual kidney function