Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparison of diagnostic performance of tests

From: Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses

Test

Sensitivity %

Specificity %

PPV%

NPV%

Area under the curve (95% confidence interval)

RMI1

63 (17/27)

93.8 (120/128)

68 (17/25)

92.3 (120/130)

.844 (0.740–0.947)

RMI2

66.7 (18/27)

89.1 (114/128)

56.3 (18/32)

92.7 (114/123)

.851 (0.762–0.940)

RMI3

63 (17/27)

90.6 (116/128)

58.6 (17/29)

92.1 (116/126)

.841 (0.749–0.932)

RMI4

66.7 (18/27)

92.2 (118/128)

64.3 (18/28)

92.9 (118/127)

.841 (0.744–0.938)

ROMA

59.3 (16/27)

93 (119/128)

64 (16/25)

91.5 (119/130)

.886 (0.805–0.967)

HE4

37 (10/27)

96.9 (124/128)

71.4 (10/14)

87.9 (124/141)

.798 (0.704–0.892)

  1. Data represented as percentages at 95% confidence interval PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, RMI Risk of malignancy index, ROMA Risk Of Malignancy Algorithm, HE4 Human Epididymis Protein 4. Cut off for RMI1, RMI2, RMI3 was 200, for RMI4 was 450; for ROMA cut off for premenopausal was 11.4, for postmenopausal was 29.9; for HE4 cut off of 70 pmol/l was used