Table 2.
The comparison of the performance of the median and receiving operating characteristics (ROC) derived optimal cut-off point in predicting the best response for atezolizumab
| Score | Cut-off point | AUC | Sensitivity (Sen) | Specificity (Spe) | Accuracy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medium | H-score | ≤0.6 | 0.714 | 1.000 | 0.571 | 0.67 |
| Deglycosylated H-score | ≤7.2 | 0.929 | 1.000 | 0.571 | 0.67 | |
| TPS | ≤0.91 | 0.714 | 1.000 | 0.571 | 0.67 | |
| Deglycosylated TPS | ≤3.76 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.571 | 0.67 | |
| Optimal | H-score | ≤0.6 | 0.714 | 1.000 | 0.571 | 0.67 |
| Deglycosylated H-score | ≤1.6 | 0.929 | 1.000 | 0.857 | 0.89 | |
| TPS | ≤0.414 | 0.714 | 1.000 | 0.714 | 0.78 | |
| Deglycosylated TPS | ≤0.839 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.00 |
Sensitivity indicates true positive rate, specificity indicates true negative rate. AUC, area under curve. Bold fonts indicates the better performance in optimal cutpoint were found in predicting the best response for Atezolizumab comparing to the median cutpoint.