Table 1.

Statistical comparison at EGFRvIII detection methods

Correlations of FFPE samples
Comparisonκ (95% CI)
L8A4 vs DAK-vIII0.62 (0.40-0.85)
FFPE RT-PCR*0.80 (0.63-0.81)
FFPE RT-PCR vs DAK-vIII0.82 (0.64-1.00)
FFPE RT-PCR vs L8A4 + DAK-vIII0.91 (0.78-1.00)
Correlations between FFPE and frozen samples
Comparison
r (P)
Frozen tissue RT-PCR vs L8A40.6 (1.4 × 10−6)
Frozen tissue RT-PCR vs DAK-vIII0.55 (3.0 × 10−5)
Frozen tissue RT-PCR vs L8A4 + DAK-vIII0.66 (4.4 × 10−8)
Frozen tissue RT-PCR vs FFPE RT-PCR*0.76 (3.7 × 10−11)
Clinical utility
Measure
% (95% CI)
Sensitivity93 (78-100)
Specificity98 (93-100)
Positive predictive value93 (78-100)
Negative predictive value98 (93-100)
  • * FFPE RT-PCR showed identical findings using either conventional semiquantitative detection on agarose gels or quantitative detection in the real-time RT-PCR assay.

  • True-positive cases consist of samples that are EGFRvIII positive on frozen tissue RT-PCR and are positive on FFPE tissue with L8A4 + DAK-vIII antibodies.