Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18925932›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2008

Tumor volume in subcutaneous mouse xenografts measured by microCT is more accurate and reproducible than determined by 18F-FDG-microPET or external caliper.

Mette Munk Jensen, Jesper Tranekjaer Jørgensen, Tina Binderup, Andreas Kjaer

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 209 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
209citing papers in PubMed
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

209 citing papers in PubMed, 392 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. LAMC2Cancer science · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. CaUltrasonics sonochemistry · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

149 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mette Munk JensenCluster for Molecular Imaging, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. mettemj@mfi.ku.dk
Jesper Tranekjaer Jørgensen
Tina Binderup
Andreas Kjaer
University of Copenhagen · DKRigshospitalet · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn animal studies tumor size is used to assess responses to anticancer therapy. Current standard for volumetric measurement of xenografted tumors is by external caliper, a method often affected by error. The aim of the present study was to evaluate if microCT gives more accurate and reproducible measures of tumor size in mice compared with caliper measurements. Furthermore, we evaluated the accuracy of tumor volume determined from 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET.

methodsSubcutaneously implanted human breast adenocarcinoma cells in NMRI nude mice served as tumor model. Tumor volume (n = 20) was determined in vivo by external caliper, microCT and 18F-FDG-PET and subsequently reference volume was determined ex vivo. Intra-observer reproducibility of the microCT and caliper methods were determined by acquiring 10 repeated volume measurements. Volumes of a group of tumors (n = 10) were determined independently by two observers to assess inter-observer variation.

resultsTumor volume measured by microCT, PET and caliper all correlated with reference volume. No significant bias of microCT measurements compared with the reference was found, whereas both PET and caliper had systematic bias compared to reference volume. Coefficients of variation for intra-observer variation were 7% and 14% for microCT and caliper measurements, respectively. Regression coefficients between observers were 0.97 for microCT and 0.91 for caliper measurements.

conclusionMicroCT was more accurate than both caliper and 18F-FDG-PET for in vivo volumetric measurements of subcutaneous tumors in mice.18F-FDG-PET was considered unsuitable for determination of tumor size. External caliper were inaccurate and encumbered with a significant and size dependent bias. MicroCT was also the most reproducible of the methods.

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18AdenocarcinomaAnimalsBreast NeoplasmsHumansMiceMice, NudePhysical ExaminationPositron-Emission TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID18925932
PMCPMC2575188
OpenAlexW2018439279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.