A task force of experts in the field of diagnostic DNA image cytometry, invited by the ESACP, and further scientists or physicians revealing experience in that diagnostic procedure (names are given in Addendum A), agreed upon the following 4th updated Consensus Report on Standardised Diagnostic DNA Image Cytometry during the 7th International Congress of that society in Caen, 2001. This report is based on the three preceding ones [6,14,17]. It deals with the following items: – Critical review and update of the definitions given in the 1997 Consensus Update; – Review and detailed description of basic terms, principles and algorithms for diagnostic interpretation; – Recommendations concerning diagnostic or prognostic applications in specific fields of tumour pathology. This update is not aimed to substitute the 1997 consensus, but to make necessary addenda and give more detailed descriptions of those items not unequivocally to interpret by potential users of the methodology.
A task force of invited experts in the field of diagnostic DNA image cytometry, especially consisting of participants from the PRESS (Prototype Reference Standard Slides) and EUROPATH (European Pathology Assisted by Telematics for Healthcare) projects, but open to any other scientist or physician revealing experience in that new diagnostic procedure (names are given in the Annex A) agreed upon the following updated consensus report during the 5th International Congress of the ESACP 1997 in Oslo. This report is based on the preceeding one [9] and on results of the above mentioned European research projects. It deals with the following items: – Biological background and aims of DNA image cytometry,– Principles of the method,– Basic performance standards,– Diagnostic interpretation of DNA measurements,– Recommendations for practical use.
An adequate reproducibility in the description of tissue architecture is still a challenge to diagnostic pathology, sometimes with unfortunate prognostic implications. To assess a possible diagnostic and prognostic value of quantitiative tissue architecture analysis, structural features based on the Voronoi Diagram (VD) and its subgraphs were developed and tested.A series of 27 structural features were developed and tested in a pilot study of 30 cases of prostate cancer, 10 cases of cervical carcinomas, 8 cases of tongue cancer and 8 cases of normal oral mucosa. Grey level images were acquired from hematoxyline‐eosine (HE) stained sections by a charge coupled device (CCD) camera mounted on a microscope connected to a personal computer (PC) with an image array processor. From the grey level images obtained, cell nuclei were automatically segmented and the geometrical centres of cell nuclei were computed. The resulting 2‐dimensional (2D) swarm of pointlike seeds distributed in a flat plane was the basis for construction of the VD and its subgraphs. From the polygons, triangulations and arborizations thus obtained, 27 structural features were computed as numerical values. Comparison of groups (normal vs. cancerous oral mucosa, cervical and prostate carcinomas with good and poor prognosis) with regard to distribution in the values of the structural features was performed with Student's t‐test.We demonstrate that some of the structural features developed are able to distinguish structurally between normal and cancerous oral mucosa (P=0.001), and between good and poor outcome groups in prostatic (P=0.001) and cervical carcinomas (P=0.001).We present results confirming previous findings that graph theory based algorithms are useful tools for describing tis‐ sue architecture (e.g., normal versus malignant). The present study also indicates that these methods have a potential for prognostication in malignant epithelial lesions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.