AIM: To highlight the use of automatic quantification of immunochemical staining on digitized images of whole tumor sections in preclinical positron emission tomography (PET) studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Xenografted human testicular tumors (36) were imaged with 2-deoxy-2[F-18]fluoro-D: -glucose (FDG) small animal PET (SA-PET). Tumor cell proliferation and glucose transportation were assessed with cyclin A and Glut-1 immunostaining. Tumor slides were digitized and processed with PixCyt software enabling whole slide quantification, then compared with junior and senior pathologist manual scoring. Manual and automatic quantification results were correlated to FDG uptake. RESULTS: For cyclin A, inter- and intra-observer agreement for manual scoring was 0.52 and 0.72 and concordance between senior pathologist and automatic quantification was 0.84. Correlations between Tumor/Background ratio and tumor cell proliferation assessed by automatic quantification, junior and senior pathologists were 0.75, 0.55, and 0.61, respectively. Correlation between Tumor/Background ratio and Glut-1 assessed by automatic quantification was 0.74. CONCLUSION: Automatic quantification of immunostaining is a valuable tool to overcome inter- and intra-observer variability for correlation of cell proliferation or other markers with tumor tracer uptake.
AIM: To highlight the use of automatic quantification of immunochemical staining on digitized images of whole tumor sections in preclinical positron emission tomography (PET) studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Xenografted humantesticular tumors (36) were imaged with 2-deoxy-2[F-18]fluoro-D: -glucose (FDG) small animal PET (SA-PET). Tumor cell proliferation and glucose transportation were assessed with cyclin A and Glut-1 immunostaining. Tumor slides were digitized and processed with PixCyt software enabling whole slide quantification, then compared with junior and senior pathologist manual scoring. Manual and automatic quantification results were correlated to FDG uptake. RESULTS: For cyclin A, inter- and intra-observer agreement for manual scoring was 0.52 and 0.72 and concordance between senior pathologist and automatic quantification was 0.84. Correlations between Tumor/Background ratio and tumor cell proliferation assessed by automatic quantification, junior and senior pathologists were 0.75, 0.55, and 0.61, respectively. Correlation between Tumor/Background ratio and Glut-1 assessed by automatic quantification was 0.74. CONCLUSION: Automatic quantification of immunostaining is a valuable tool to overcome inter- and intra-observer variability for correlation of cell proliferation or other markers with tumor tracer uptake.
Authors: L Calvet; B Geoerger; M Regairaz; P Opolon; L Machet; J Morizet; J-M Joseph; N Elie; G Vassal Journal: Oncogene Date: 2006-05-25 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Donna S Dorow; Carleen Cullinane; Nelly Conus; Peter Roselt; David Binns; Timothy J McCarthy; Grant A McArthur; Rodney J Hicks Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Lieselot Brepoels; Sigrid Stroobants; Peter Vandenberghe; Karoline Spaepen; Patrick Dupont; Johan Nuyts; Guy Bormans; Luc Mortelmans; Gregor Verhoef; Christiane De Wolf-Peeters Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Carleen Cullinane; Donna S Dorow; Maya Kansara; Nelly Conus; David Binns; Rodney J Hicks; Leonie K Ashman; Grant A McArthur; David M Thomas Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701