Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31299926›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

Best fitting tumor growth models of the von Bertalanffy-PütterType.

Manfred Kühleitner, Norbert Brunner, Werner-Georg Nowak, Katharina Renner-Martin, Klaus Scheicher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

5 authors.

Manfred KühleitnerInstitute of Mathematics, Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Gregor Mendel Strasse 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria. manfred.kuehleitner@boku.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0217-7550
Norbert BrunnerInstitute of Mathematics, Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Gregor Mendel Strasse 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria.
Werner-Georg NowakInstitute of Mathematics, Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Gregor Mendel Strasse 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria.
Katharina Renner-MartinInstitute of Mathematics, Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Gregor Mendel Strasse 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria.
Klaus ScheicherInstitute of Mathematics, Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Gregor Mendel Strasse 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

Universität für Bodenkultur Wien not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLongitudinal studies of tumor volume have used certain named mathematical growth models. The Bertalanffy-Pütter differential equation unifies them: It uses five parameters, amongst them two exponents related to tumor metabolism and morphology. Each exponent-pair defines a unique three-parameter model of the Bertalanffy-Pütter type, and the above-mentioned named models correspond to specific exponent-pairs. Amongst these models we seek the best fitting one.

methodThe best fitting model curve within the Bertalanffy-Pütter class minimizes the sum of squared errors (SSE). We investigate also near-optimal model curves; their SSE is at most a certain percentage (e.g. 1%) larger than the minimal SSE. Models with near-optimal curves are visualized by the region of their near-optimal exponent pairs. While there is barely a visible difference concerning the goodness of fit between the best fitting and the near-optimal model curves, there are differences in the prognosis, whence the near-optimal models are used to assess the uncertainty of extrapolation.

resultsFor data about the growth of an untreated tumor we found the best fitting growth model which reduced SSE by about 30% compared to the hitherto best fit. In order to analyze the uncertainty of prognosis, we repeated the search for the optimal and near-optimal exponent-pairs for the initial segments of the data (meaning the subset of the data for the first n days) and compared the prognosis based on these models with the actual data (i.e. the data for the remaining days). The optimal exponent-pairs and the regions of near-optimal exponent-pairs depended on how many data-points were used. Further, the regions of near-optimal exponent-pairs were larger for the first initial segments, where fewer data were used.

conclusionWhile for each near optimal exponent-pair its best fitting model curve remained close to the fitted data points, the prognosis using these model curves differed widely for the remaining data, whence e.g. the best fitting model for the first 65 days of growth was not capable to inform about tumor size for the remaining 49 days. For the present data, prognosis appeared to be feasible for a time span of ten days, at most.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalTumor BurdenAlgorithmsHumansNeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsBertalanffy-Pütter growth modelsCancerSimulated annealingTumor growth

Identifiers

PMID31299926
PMCPMC6624893

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.