Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 29;2(1):95–103. doi: 10.1016/j.xfre.2020.12.004

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. (A) Comparison of ROC curves for FOXO1, GZMB, IL15, SCNN1A, SGK1, and SLC2A1. The corresponding AUC values of the ROC curves are shown for each gene. (B) ROC curve analysis for the cumulative score model (decidualization score) determined a cutoff criterion to identify compromised samples. The AUC, its P value (the probability that the AUC is different from the null hypothesis: AUC = 0.5), the cutoff point with the best separation between the 2 groups (the criterion), and the associated sensitivity and specificity values are presented on the graph. Kruskal-Wallis test. ∗∗∗ P<.001 for RPL or UI versus Control; ns = nonsignificant difference. (C) Comparison of decidualization scores between women with RPL, UI, and healthy controls. The RPL group included cases of primary and secondary infertility. Statistical analysis was performed with Welch’s adjusted t-test and the Kruskal-Wallis test. ∗∗∗ P<.001 for RPL versus Control, and UI versus Control; ns = nonsignificant difference. (D, E). Proportion of decidualization scores in the healthy control group (D) and in the patient group (E).