ArticleIET systems biology2014
Accounting for randomness in measurement and sampling in studying cancer cell population dynamics.
Article in IET systems biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Knowing the expected temporal evolution of the proportion of different cell types in sample tissues gives an indication about the progression of the disease and its possible response to drugs. Such systems have been modelled using Markov processes. We here consider an experimentally realistic scenario in which transition probabilities are estimated from noisy cell population size measurements. Using aggregated data of FACS measurements, we develop MMSE and ML estimators and formulate two problems to find the minimum number of required samples and measurements to guarantee the accuracy of predicted population sizes. Our numerical results show that the convergence mechanism of transition probabilities and steady states differ widely from the real values if one uses the standard deterministic approach for noisy measurements. This provides support for our argument that for the analysis of FACS data one should consider the observed state as a random variable. The second problem we address is about the consequences of estimating the probability of a cell being in a particular state from measurements of small population of cells. We show how the uncertainty arising from small sample sizes can be captured by a distribution for the state probability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.