ArticleScientific reports2025
Proper likelihood functions for parameter estimation in S-shaped models of unperturbed tumor growth.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The analysis of unperturbed tumor growth kinetics, particularly the estimation of parameters for S-shaped equations used to describe growth, requires an appropriate likelihood function that accounts for the increasing error in solid tumor measurements as tumor size grows over time. This study aims to propose suitable likelihood functions for parameter estimation in S-shaped models of unperturbed tumor growth. Five different likelihood functions are evaluated and compared using three Bayesian criteria (the Bayesian Information Criterion, Deviance Information Criterion, and Bayes Factor) along with hypothesis tests on residuals. These functions are applied to fit data from unperturbed Ehrlich, fibrosarcoma Sa-37, and F3II tumors using the Gompertz equation, though they are generalizable to other S-shaped growth models for solid tumors or analogous systems (e.g., microorganisms, viruses). Results indicate that error models with tumor volume-dependent dispersion outperform standard constant-variance models in capturing the variability of tumor measurements, particularly the Thres model, which provides interpretable parameters for tumor growth. Additionally, constant-variance models, such as those assuming a normal error distribution, remain valuable as complementary benchmarks in analysis. It is concluded that models incorporating volume-dependent dispersion are preferred for accurate and clinically meaningful tumor growth modeling, whereas constant-dispersion models serve as useful complements for consistency and historical comparability.
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.