ArticlePloS one2016
Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Imaging of the Skeletal System: Overview of Applications in Human and Veterinary Medicine.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Optimization, Characterization, and Comparison of Two Luciferase-Expressing Mouse Glioblastoma Models.Cancers · 2024Article
- A clinically relevant computed tomography (CT) radiomics strategy for intracranial rodent brain tumour monitoring.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Radioproteomics modeling of metformin-enhanced radiosensitivity: an animal study.Japanese journal of radiology · 2023Article
- 3D visualization and morphometric analysis of spinal motion segments and vascular networks: A synchrotron radiation-based micro-CT study in mice.Journal of anatomy · 2022Article
- Is it possible to estimate volume of bone defects formed on dry sheep mandibles more practically by secondarily reconstructing section thickness of cone beam computed tomography images?Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2021Article
- Dilation of Brain Veins and Perivascular Infiltration by Glioblastoma Cells in anBioMed research international · 2021Article
- Imaging of Mouse Brain Fixated in Ethanol in Micro-CT.BioMed research international · 2019Article
- Comparisons of the accuracy of radiation diagnostic modalities in brain tumor: A nonrandomized, nonexperimental, cross-sectional trial.Medicine · 2018Article
- Fluorescence Molecular Tomography for In Vivo Imaging of Glioblastoma Xenografts.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2018Article
- Function of neuronal nitric oxide synthase enzyme in temozolomide-induced damage of astrocytic tumor cells.Oncology letters · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is an increasing need for small animal in vivo imaging in murine orthotopic glioma models. Because dedicated small animal scanners are not available ubiquitously, the applicability of a clinical CT scanner for visualization and measurement of intracerebrally growing glioma xenografts in living mice was validated. MATERIALS AND
methods2.5x106 U87MG cells were orthotopically implanted in NOD/SCID/ᵞc-/- mice (n = 9). Mice underwent contrast-enhanced (300 μl Iomeprol i.v.) imaging using a micro-CT (80 kV, 75 μAs, 360° rotation, 1,000 projections, scan time 33 s, resolution 40 x 40 x 53 μm) and a clinical CT scanner (4-row multislice detector; 120 kV, 150 mAs, slice thickness 0.5 mm, feed rotation 0.5 mm, resolution 98 x 98 x 500 μm). Mice were sacrificed and the brain was worked up histologically. In all modalities tumor volume was measured by two independent readers. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured from reconstructed CT-scans (0.5 mm slice thickness; n = 18).
resultsTumor volumes (mean±SD mm3) were similar between both CT-modalities (micro-CT: 19.8±19.0, clinical CT: 19.8±18.8; Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.813). Moreover, between reader analyses for each modality showed excellent agreement as demonstrated by correlation analysis (Spearman-Rho >0.9; p<0.01 for all correlations). Histologically measured tumor volumes (11.0±11.2) were significantly smaller due to shrinkage artifacts (p<0.05). CNR and SNR were 2.1±1.0 and 1.1±0.04 for micro-CT and 23.1±24.0 and 1.9±0.7 for the clinical CTscanner, respectively.
conclusionClinical CT scanners may reliably be used for in vivo imaging and volumetric analysis of brain tumor growth in mice.
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.