Table 3 Comparison of diagnostic performance of different dd-cfDNA thresholds for detecting liver graft injury
Study design and sample size | Year | Sample types | Assay method | Injury types | Thresholds | ROC-AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Multi-center Prospective (n = 107) | 2017 | Plasma | dd-PCR | AR | 10.00% | 0.97 | 90.30% | 92.90% | [5] |
Single-center Prospective (n = 40) | 2019 | Plasma | dd-PCR | AR | 898 cp/mL | 0.99 | 83.30% | 100.00% | [58] |
Single-center Prospective (n = 49) | 2021 | Plasma | NGS | Pediatric Rejection | 28.70% | 0.88 | 72.70% | 94.70% | [45] |
Single-center Retrospective (n = 27) | 2022 | Plasma | qPCR | AR | 13.80% | 0.77 | 85.70% | 63.30% | [56] |
Single-center Prospective (n = 51) | 2022 | Plasma | dd-PCR | TCMR | 33.50% | 0.73 | NA | 97.00% | [42] |
Multi-center Prospective (n = 219) | 2022 | Plasma | NGS | AR | 5.30% | 0.95 | 87.00% | NA | [2] |