Xenograft Tumor Volume Measurement in Nude Mice: Estimation of 3D Ultrasound Volume Measurements Based on Manual Caliper Measurements

M. Baris, E. Serinan, M. Calisir, Kursat Simsek, S. Aktaş, O. Yılmaz, S.K. Ozdemir, M. Seçil
{"title":"Xenograft Tumor Volume Measurement in Nude Mice: Estimation of 3D Ultrasound Volume Measurements Based on Manual Caliper Measurements","authors":"M. Baris, E. Serinan, M. Calisir, Kursat Simsek, S. Aktaş, O. Yılmaz, S.K. Ozdemir, M. Seçil","doi":"10.30621/jbachs.2020.902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Volume measurement of subcutaneous xenograft tumors in nude mice models is an important metric to assess tumor growth or response to therapy. Manual calipers are widely used for this purpose. But the measurements with manual calipers may be inaccurate. Contrarily, three-dimensional (3D) ultrasonographic measurements give reliable and accurate tumor volume calculation. We aim to; evaluate the accuracy of common four formulas given in the literature to estimate xenograft tumor volumes based on manual caliper measurements and offer a new coefficient for a better estimation of the tumor volumes. Patients and Methods: Detailed manual diameter measurements of xenograft tumors were in 14 nude mice performed using Vernier caliper. Tumor volumes were calculated using the suggested formulas in the literature based on manual measurements. 3D ultrasound volume measurements were performed on same xenograft tumors using high resolution Vevo 2100 imaging system. To propose a new coefficient; means of ratio between manual and ultrasound volume measurement values were used. Also, data set was divided into two subgroups as tumor volume under 800 mm3 and over 800 mm. New coefficients for each subgroup were defined. Results: Only with prolate ellipsoid formula there was no statistically significant difference between volume measurements with two methods (p=0,24). Our proposed formula (0,45 L*W*H) could estimate tumor volumes as good as prolate ellipsoid formula. Coefficient 0,35 and 0,81 in the same formula were found efficient in the selected subgroups. Conclusion: Using one common coefficient/formula for tumor volume estimation in any tumor size can be inaccurate. Appropriate coefficient should be chosen according to the dataset worked with.","PeriodicalId":245385,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30621/jbachs.2020.902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Objectives: Volume measurement of subcutaneous xenograft tumors in nude mice models is an important metric to assess tumor growth or response to therapy. Manual calipers are widely used for this purpose. But the measurements with manual calipers may be inaccurate. Contrarily, three-dimensional (3D) ultrasonographic measurements give reliable and accurate tumor volume calculation. We aim to; evaluate the accuracy of common four formulas given in the literature to estimate xenograft tumor volumes based on manual caliper measurements and offer a new coefficient for a better estimation of the tumor volumes. Patients and Methods: Detailed manual diameter measurements of xenograft tumors were in 14 nude mice performed using Vernier caliper. Tumor volumes were calculated using the suggested formulas in the literature based on manual measurements. 3D ultrasound volume measurements were performed on same xenograft tumors using high resolution Vevo 2100 imaging system. To propose a new coefficient; means of ratio between manual and ultrasound volume measurement values were used. Also, data set was divided into two subgroups as tumor volume under 800 mm3 and over 800 mm. New coefficients for each subgroup were defined. Results: Only with prolate ellipsoid formula there was no statistically significant difference between volume measurements with two methods (p=0,24). Our proposed formula (0,45 L*W*H) could estimate tumor volumes as good as prolate ellipsoid formula. Coefficient 0,35 and 0,81 in the same formula were found efficient in the selected subgroups. Conclusion: Using one common coefficient/formula for tumor volume estimation in any tumor size can be inaccurate. Appropriate coefficient should be chosen according to the dataset worked with.
裸鼠异种移植肿瘤体积测量:基于手动卡尺测量的三维超声体积测量估计
目的:测量裸鼠皮下异种移植肿瘤的体积是评估肿瘤生长或对治疗反应的重要指标。手动卡尺广泛用于此目的。但是用手动卡尺测量可能不准确。相反,三维(3D)超声测量提供可靠和准确的肿瘤体积计算。我们的目标是;评估文献中给出的基于人工卡尺测量估计异种移植肿瘤体积的常用四种公式的准确性,并为更好地估计肿瘤体积提供新的系数。患者和方法:用游标卡尺对14只裸鼠的异种移植肿瘤进行了详细的人工直径测量。肿瘤体积的计算采用文献中建议的公式,基于人工测量。采用高分辨率Vevo 2100成像系统对同种异种移植肿瘤进行三维超声体积测量。提出一个新的系数;采用人工与超声体积测量值之比的方法。同时,将数据集按肿瘤体积小于800 mm和大于800 mm分为两个亚组。定义每个子组的新系数。结果:仅使用长椭球公式,两种方法的体积测量差异无统计学意义(p=0,24)。我们提出的公式(0,45 L*W*H)可以像长椭球体公式一样准确地估计肿瘤体积。同一公式中的系数0.35和0.81在所选的亚组中是有效的。结论:在任何肿瘤大小的情况下,使用一个通用的系数/公式来估计肿瘤体积都是不准确的。应根据使用的数据集选择合适的系数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信