1997
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0320(19970601)28:2<176::aid-cyto12>3.0.co;2-n
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Variability of DNA analysis by image cytometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Studies using automated image analysis in classi cation of neoplasms (70) have shown a sensitivity of 85% to 99%, a speci city of 86% to 98% and a positive predictive value of 87% to 97%. Variability in automated image analysis (42) has been due to specimen variability in systematic sampling in 92% of the cases and specimen variability in selective sampling in 67%. Technical variability has been responsible for 10% of the differences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Studies using automated image analysis in classi cation of neoplasms (70) have shown a sensitivity of 85% to 99%, a speci city of 86% to 98% and a positive predictive value of 87% to 97%. Variability in automated image analysis (42) has been due to specimen variability in systematic sampling in 92% of the cases and specimen variability in selective sampling in 67%. Technical variability has been responsible for 10% of the differences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clinical applications in tumor prognostication have also been proposed. Variability in automated image analysis occurs, and Reeder et al (42) reported signi cant differences to be due to specimen variability in sampling. Studies involving controlled conditions and de ned endpoints are few.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The OD lymphocyte nuclei from each section served as an internal control (diploid reference). The resultant DNA histograms were analysed using previously described methods (Raju et al 1993;Cajulis et al 1995;Reeder et al 1997). The G0/G1 peak was identified visually in each lesion, and the mean, standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV) values were calculated.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most software packages include data filters to automatically eliminate objects touching the edge of the field or falling outside a specified size range. Consistency in the criteria employed for exclusion is important for minimizing variability in results obtained by different investigators (e.g., Thunnissen et al 1996Thunnissen et al ,1997Reeder et al 1997;Vilhar et al 2001).…”
Section: Outline Of Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As with flow cytometry, the use of image analysis technology in DNA quantification began in cancer diagnosis (e.g., Borgiani et al 1994;Fischler et al 1994). Given the extreme importance of accuracy in such an application, it is not surprising that the fidelity of the technique has been scrutinized with exceptional rigour (e.g., Böcking et al 1995;Thunnissen et al 1996Thunnissen et al ,1997Reeder et al 1997;Puech and Giroud 1999). Comparisons have shown that flow cytometry and image analysis provide similar efficacy of DNA quantification for diagnostic purposes (e.g., Bertino et al 1994;Borgiani et al 1994;Marcos et al 1998).…”
Section: Image Analysis Densitometrymentioning
confidence: 99%