TABLE 2.

The AUC values of classifying models

	Features	CON versus NSCLCa	CON versus I_IIIa	I_III versus DMa	CON versus DMa
Sputum	All	0.750	0.850	0.767	0.744
	DAMb	0.728	0.867	0.742	0.756
	RFEc	0.803	0.850	0.708	0.739
Gut	All	0.760	0.817	0.760	0.650
	DAMb	0.515	—d	—	—
	RFEc	0.692	0.717	0.673	0.720
Sputum + gut	All	0.825	0.896	0.754	0.866
	RFEc	0.783	0.854	0.691	0.804

^aIn each comparison (e.g., CON versus NSCLC), the modeling strategies with the highest and lowest performance as measured by AUC values are highlighted in bold font and gray shading, respectively.

^bDAM, differentially abundant microbes. In more than 90% of tests, there were too few or no differentially abundant genera, so it was considered that the DAM model was not suitable for fecal microbiota.

^cRFE, features with top-ranked contributions to the models were used (see Materials and Methods).

^d—, indicates no data.