ArticleTranslational oncology2018
Comparison of Two Mathematical Models of Cellularity Calculation.
Article in Translational oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surrogating tumour cell density in head and neck cancer: [Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Diffusion tensor imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging on axillary lymph node status in breast cancer patients.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2022Article
- Associations between dynamic-contrast enhanced MRI and tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and tumor-stroma ratio in head and neck squamous cell cancer.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectNowadays, there is increasing evidence that functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modalities, namely, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic-contrast enhanced MRI (DCE MRI), can characterize tumor architecture like cellularity and vascularity. Previously, two formulas based on a logistic tumor growth model were proposed to predict tumor cellularity with DWI and DCE. The purpose of this study was to proof these formulas.
methods16 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas were included into the study. There were 2 women and 14 men with a mean age of 57.0 ± 7.5 years. In every case, tumor cellularity was calculated using the proposed formulas by Atuegwu et al. In every case, also tumor cell count was estimated on histopathological specimens as an average cell count per 2 to 5 high-power fields.
resultsThere was no significant correlation between the calculated cellularity and histopathologically estimated cell count by using the formula based on apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. A moderate positive correlation (r=0.515, P=.041) could be identified by using the formula including ADC and V
conclusionsThe formula including ADC and V
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.