Cargando…
Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation
OBJECT: Nowadays, there is increasing evidence that functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modalities, namely, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic-contrast enhanced MRI (DCE MRI), can characterize tumor architecture like cellularity and vascularity. Previously, two formulas based on a...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Neoplasia Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5884215/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29413764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranon.2018.01.020 |
_version_ | 1783311782263128064 |
---|---|
author | Meyer, Hans Jonas Garnov, Nikita Surov, Alexey |
author_facet | Meyer, Hans Jonas Garnov, Nikita Surov, Alexey |
author_sort | Meyer, Hans Jonas |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECT: Nowadays, there is increasing evidence that functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modalities, namely, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic-contrast enhanced MRI (DCE MRI), can characterize tumor architecture like cellularity and vascularity. Previously, two formulas based on a logistic tumor growth model were proposed to predict tumor cellularity with DWI and DCE. The purpose of this study was to proof these formulas. METHODS: 16 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas were included into the study. There were 2 women and 14 men with a mean age of 57.0 ± 7.5 years. In every case, tumor cellularity was calculated using the proposed formulas by Atuegwu et al. In every case, also tumor cell count was estimated on histopathological specimens as an average cell count per 2 to 5 high-power fields. RESULTS: There was no significant correlation between the calculated cellularity and histopathologically estimated cell count by using the formula based on apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. A moderate positive correlation (r=0.515, P=.041) could be identified by using the formula including ADC and V(e) values. CONCLUSIONS: The formula including ADC and V(e) values is more sensitive to predict tumor cellularity than the formula including ADC values only. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5884215 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Neoplasia Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58842152018-04-06 Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation Meyer, Hans Jonas Garnov, Nikita Surov, Alexey Transl Oncol Original article OBJECT: Nowadays, there is increasing evidence that functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modalities, namely, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic-contrast enhanced MRI (DCE MRI), can characterize tumor architecture like cellularity and vascularity. Previously, two formulas based on a logistic tumor growth model were proposed to predict tumor cellularity with DWI and DCE. The purpose of this study was to proof these formulas. METHODS: 16 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas were included into the study. There were 2 women and 14 men with a mean age of 57.0 ± 7.5 years. In every case, tumor cellularity was calculated using the proposed formulas by Atuegwu et al. In every case, also tumor cell count was estimated on histopathological specimens as an average cell count per 2 to 5 high-power fields. RESULTS: There was no significant correlation between the calculated cellularity and histopathologically estimated cell count by using the formula based on apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. A moderate positive correlation (r=0.515, P=.041) could be identified by using the formula including ADC and V(e) values. CONCLUSIONS: The formula including ADC and V(e) values is more sensitive to predict tumor cellularity than the formula including ADC values only. Neoplasia Press 2018-02-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5884215/ /pubmed/29413764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranon.2018.01.020 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Neoplasia Press, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original article Meyer, Hans Jonas Garnov, Nikita Surov, Alexey Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation |
title | Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation |
title_full | Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation |
title_short | Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation |
title_sort | comparison of two mathematical models of cellularity calculation |
topic | Original article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5884215/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29413764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranon.2018.01.020 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT meyerhansjonas comparisonoftwomathematicalmodelsofcellularitycalculation AT garnovnikita comparisonoftwomathematicalmodelsofcellularitycalculation AT surovalexey comparisonoftwomathematicalmodelsofcellularitycalculation |