Table 2 Ability of mesothelin to predict radiological progression depending on cut-off used and radiological reporting method
From: A prospective study to investigate the role of serial serum mesothelin in monitoring mesothelioma
Mesothelin Cut-off | 10% | 15% | 25% | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CT reporting method | Clinically reported CT | MRECIST | Clinically reported CT | MRECIST | Clinically reported CT | MRECIST |
No. | 43 | 25 | 43 | 25 | 43 | 25 |
Sensitivity | 95.8 (78.8–99.8) | 90.9 (58.7–99.7) | 83.3 (62.6–95.3) | 72.7 (39.0–93.9) | 80.0 (59.3–93.2) | 72.7 (39.0–93.9) |
Specificity | 73.7 (48.8–90.8) | 57.1 (28.9–82.3) | 84.2 (60.4–96.6) | 71.4 (41.9–91.6) | 84.2 (60.4–96.6) | 71.4 (41.9–91.6) |
PPV | 82.1 (68.3–90.8) | 62.5 (46.9–75.8) | 87.0 (69.9–95.0) | 66.7 (44.7–83.2) | 87.0 (69.9–95.0) | 66.7 (44.7–83.2) |
NPV | 93.3 (66.8–99.0) | 88.9 (53.9–98.2) | 80 (61.7–90.9) | 76.9 (54.6–90.2) | 76.2 (58.8–87.8) | 76.9 (54.6–90.2) |
Accuracy | 86.0% | 83.7% | 0.81% | |||