Nuclear shape: An independent predictor of survival in patients with ovarian carcinoma

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 164-167

  Geisler, J P ^a,c   Geisler, H E ^a   Wiemann, M C ^b   Givens, S S ^c   Zhou, Z ^d   Miller, G A ^d  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Division of Hematology and Oncology   (United States)

^c ST VINCENT HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d Dept Pathol Lab Diagn/Analyt C ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Image analysis; Nuclear morphometry; Ovarian cancer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL NUCLEUS; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MORPHOMETRICS; OVARY CARCINOMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0031834254     PISSN: 1048891X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1438.1998.09723.x     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Weger AR, Lindholm J, Glaser K, Mairinger T, Mikuz G. Morphometry and prognosis in cancer of the pancreatic head. Path Res Pract 1992; 188: 764-9.
2. Epstein JI, Berry SJ, Eggleston JC. Nuclear roundness factor: A Predictor of progression in untreated stage A2 prostate cancer. Cancer 1984; 54:1666-71.
3. Baak JP, Langley FA, Talerman A, Delemarre JF. The prognostic variability of ovarian tumor grading by different pathologists. Gynecol Oncol 1987; 27: 166-72.
4. Baak JP. Possibilities and progress of quantitative pathological examination of ovarian tumours. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1998; 29: 183-9.
5. Baak JP. The principles and advances of quantitative pathology. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1994; 9: 89-95.
6. Pathology manual: Gynecologic Oncology Group. (Benda J, Zaino R, eds.). 1995.
7. Mendelsohn ML, Mayall BH. Chromosome identification by image analysis and quantitative cytochemistry. In: Junis JJ, ed. Human Chromosome Methodology. (2nd ed.) New York: Academic Press, 1974; 311-46.
8. Bacus JW, Grade LJ. Microscope system for standardized cell measurements and analyses. Appl Optics 1987; 26: 3280-93.
9. Russack V. Image cytometry: Current applications and future trend. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 1994; 31: 1-34.
10. Baak JP. The use and disuse of morphometry in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia and carcinoma. Pathol Res Pract 1984; 179: 20-3.
11. Miller BE, Lavia LA, Horbelt DV. The prognostic value of image analysis in ovarian cancer. Cancer 1991; 67: 1318-21.
12. Hytiroglou P, Harpaz N, Heller DS, Liu Z, Deligdisch L, Gil J. Differential diagnosis of borderline and invasive serous cystadenocarcinomas of the ovary by computerized interactive morphometric analysis of nuclear features. Cancer 1992; 69: 988-92.
13. Deligdisch L, Kerner H, Cohen CJ, Dargent D, Gil J. Morphometric differentiation between responsive tumor cells and mesothelial hyperplasia in second-look operations for ovarian cancer. Hum Pathol 1993; 24:143-7.
14. Miller B, Umpierre S, Tornos C, Burke T. Histologic characterization of uterine papillary serous adenocarcinomas. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 56: 425-9.
15. Giardina C, Ricco R, Serio G, Vacca E, Pennella A, Renzulli G, Punzo C, Borzacchini AM, Delfino VP. Nuclear shape and axillary metastases in breast cancer: Analytic morphometry of aspiration smears. Acta Cytol 1994; 38: 341-6.
16. Mohler JL, Metts JC, Zhang XZ, Maygarden SJ. Nuclear morphometry in automatic biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens of prostatic carcinoma: A comparison. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1994; 16: 415-20.
17. Borland RN, Partin AW, Epstein JI, Brendler CB. The use of nuclear morphometry in predicting recurrence of transitional cell carcinoma. J Urol 1993; 149: 272-5.
18. Kirn D, Charlton JD, Coggins JM, Mohler JL. Semi-automated nuclear shape analysis of prostatic carcinoma and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1994; 16: 400-14.
19. Brinkhuis M, Baak JPA, Meijer GA, van Diest PJ, Mogensen O, Bichel P, Neijt JP. Value of quantitative pathological variables as prognostic factors in advanced ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49: 142-8.