The measurement of the DeHCA biomarker made using Comfortscan images showed a lower accuracy than mammography, US, and their combination using the optimal cutoff (0.85) obtained by ROC analysis, with 78% sensitivity, 52% specificity, 40% PPV, and 85% NPV; using a threshold of 0.8, sensitivity reached 93% and NPV 91%, but specificity fell to only 32% and PPV to only 37%.
Using the optimal cutoff (0.85), DeHCA score was less accurate than mammography, US, and their combination, with 78% sensitivity, 52% specificity, 40% positive predictive value (PPV), and 85% negative predictive value (NPV); using a 0.8 cutoff, sensitivity reached 93% and NPV 91%, but specificity fell to 32% and PPV to 37%.
However, using the optimal cutoff (0.85) or a threshold of 0.8 for DeHCA score, accuracy remained significantly lower than mammography or US alone, not allowing for a stand-alone use of the current status of this technology in breast cancer diagnosis.
The sensitivity of both parameters using the optimal cutoff value was the same (70.8%).
Patients were divided into two groups by using the optimal cutoff value for ScvO2.
The clinical performance of candidate genes was validated using the optimal cutoff values in the testing set.
The strength of relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using the optimal cutoffs of BMI and WHtR in cross-sectional studies, while any available cutoff was used in prospective studies.
Using the optimal CA5 cutoff point, detection rate for massive transfusion was 72.7% and 77.5% for EXTEM and FIBTEM respectively.
DeHCA optical image processing showed a lower accuracy compared to mammography, US, and their combination using either the optimal cutoff value (0.85) or the cutoff of 0.8.
The DeHCA score performance was evaluated by using both the optimal cutoff value (0.85) and also the 0.80 value (to maximise sensitivity).
Using ROC curves, the optimal cutoff value by real-time PCR was 418.4 copies/104 PBL (sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 89.7%).
