Table 3

Performance of single antibody tests and selected combinations n = 268, 149 CD patients and 119 controls
fn fp nc sens spec ppv npv effic lr+ lr-
Single tests % % % % %
IgA anti-dpgli 33 4 0 78 97 97 78 86 23 0.23
IgG anti-dpgli 22 10 0 85 92 93 83 88 10 0.16
IgA anti-tTG 5 16 0 97 87 90 95 92 7 0.04
EMA 3 18 0 98 85 89 97 98 6 0.02
Combinations of 2 tests IgG anti-dpgli +
IgA anti-tTG 2 5 39 83 82 96 98 83 20 0.04
IgG anti-dpgli + EMA 1 6 39 84 82 95 99 83 17 0.01
IgA anti-dpgli + IgG anti-dpgli 15 1 37 73 89 99 88 80 87 0.11
Combinations of 3 tests IgA anti-dpgli +
IgG anti-dpgli + EMA 1 1 62 72 81 99 99 76 86 0.01
IgA anti-dpgli + IgG anti-dpgli + IgA anti-tTG* 2 1 60 73 81 99 98 76 87 0.01
IgG anti-dpgli + EMA + IgA anti-tTG 0 5 45 83 80 96 100 81 20 0.00
Combination of 4 tests IgG anti-dpgli +
IgA anti-dpgli + EMA + IgA anti-tTG 0 1 65 72 79 99 100 75 86 0.00

*This test combination is identical to the test in Table 2.

Positive, above the cut-off in all tests; negative, below the cut-off in all tests; fn, number of false-negative patients; fp, number of false-positive patients; nc, number of patients not classified because of discordant antibody results; sens, sensitivity; spec,specificity; ppv, positive predictive value; npv, negative predictive value; effic, efficiency; lr+, likelihood ratio positive; lr-, likelihood ratio negative.

Bürgin-Wolff et al.

Bürgin-Wolff et al. BMC Gastroenterology 2013 13:19   doi:10.1186/1471-230X-13-19

Open Data