Table 2 |
||||||||
|
Results of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of SPR array compared to ELISA assay results |
||||||||
|
Antigen numbera |
Sensitivity (%)b |
Specificity (%)b |
PPV (%)b |
NPV (%)b |
||||
|
SPR |
ELISA |
SPR |
ELISA |
SPR |
ELISA |
SPR |
ELISA |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
W06 |
79 |
10 |
96 |
100 |
96 |
100 |
82 |
52 |
|
W10 |
45 |
38 |
100 |
96 |
100 |
92 |
64 |
60 |
|
W14 |
59 |
24 |
100 |
96 |
100 |
88 |
70 |
55 |
|
W19 |
31 |
62 |
96 |
79 |
90 |
75 |
57 |
67 |
|
W28 |
86 |
34 |
93 |
96 |
93 |
91 |
87 |
59 |
|
W38 |
79 |
24 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
82 |
56 |
|
W64 |
69 |
17 |
100 |
93 |
100 |
71 |
76 |
53 |
|
W70 |
14 |
24 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
53 |
56 |
|
W85 |
76 |
28 |
96 |
96 |
96 |
89 |
79 |
56 |
|
Multi-Ag |
100 |
90 |
89 |
57 |
91 |
68 |
100 |
84 |
|
|
||||||||
|
aA total of nine M. tuberculosis related antigens were used for the test. bResults shown were averages of three independent experiments. PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; SPR, surface plasmon resonance; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; Ag, antigen. |
||||||||
|
Hsieh et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2012 7:180 doi:10.1186/1556-276X-7-180 |
||||||||