Nuclear morphometric analysis: Description of the methodology and the role of image-editing softwares;Análise da morfometria nuclear: Descrição da metodologia e o papel dos softwares de edição de imagem

Jornal Brasileiro de Patologia e Medicina Laboratorial

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 51-57

  De Andrea, Carlos Eduardo ^a   Bleggi Torres, Luiz Fernando ^b   Alves, Maria Teresa De Seixas ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PARANÁ   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Image analysis; Morphometry; Nuclear morphometry

Indexed keywords

EID: 45349097806     PISSN: 16762444     EISSN: 16784774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s1676-24442008000100010     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. APEL, R. et al. Nuclear polymorphism in osteosarcomas as a prognostic factor for the effect of chemotherapy: a quantitative study. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol, v. 405, n. 2, p. 215-23, 1985.
2. BAAK, J.P. The principles and advances of quantitative pathology. Anal Quant Cytol Histol, v. 9, p. 89-95, 1987.
3. BACUS, J.W. et al. Quantitation of preinvasive neoplastic progression in animal models of chemical carcinogenesis. J Cell Biochem Suppl, v. 29, p. 21-38, 1997.
4. BOONE, C.W. et al. Quantitative grading of rat esophageal carcinogenesis using computer-assisted image tile analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers & Prev, v. 9, p. 495-500, 2000.
5. BRESLOW, N.E. et al. Nuclear morphometry and prognosis in favorable histology Wilms' tumor: a prospective reevaluation. J Clin Oncology, v. 17, n. 7, p. 2123-6, 1999.
6. BUHMEIDA, A. Quantitative pathology: historical background, clinical research and application of nuclear morphometry and DNA image cytometry. Libyan J Med, AOP: 060911, 2006.
7. CARR, I.; PETTIGREW, N. How malignant is malignant? A brief review of the microscopic assessment of human neoplasms, and the prediction of whether they will metastasize and kill. Clin Exp Metastasis, v. 9, p. 127-37, 1991.
8. COLLAN, Y. et al. Application of morphometry in tumor pathology. Anal Quant Cytol Histol, v. 9, p. 79-88 , 1987.
9. DIAMOND, D.A. et al. A new method to assess metastatic potential of human prostate cancer: relative nuclear roundness. J. Urol., v. 128, p. 729-34, 1982.
10. DOUDKINE, A. et al. Nuclear texture measurements in image cytometry. Pathologica, v. 87, p. 286-99 , 1995.
11. GIL, J. et al. Image analysis and morphometry in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Microsc Res Tech, v. 59. p. 109-18, 2002.
12. GILCHRIST, K.W. et al. Prognostic significance of nuclear sizing in renal cell carcinoma. Urology, v. 24, p. 122-4, 1981.
13. GUTIERREZ, J.L. et al. Nuclear morphometry in prognosis of renal adenocarcinoma. Urology, v. 39, p. 130-4, 1992.
14. HAMILTON, P.W. et al. Nuclear texture measurements in normal colorectal glands. Anal Quant Cytol Histol, v. 17, p. 397-405, 1995.
15. HOGBERG, T. et al. Nuclear morphometry: a strong prognostic factor for survival after secondary surgery in advanced ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer, v. 2, p. 198-206, 1992.
16. ISHIDA, T. et al. Histological grading and morphometric analysis of cartilaginous tumours. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. v. 418, n. 2, p. 149-55, 1991.
17. KAZANOWSKA, B. et al. The role of nuclear morphometry in prediction of prognosis for rhabdomyosarcoma in children. Histopathology, v. 45, p. 352-9, 2004.
18. MARKOPOULOS, C. et al. Application of the learning vector quantizer to the classification of breast lesions. Anal Quant Cytol Histol, v. 19, p. 453-60, 1997.
19. MEIJER, G.A. et al. Origins of image analysis in clinical pathology. J Clin Pathol, v. 50, p. 365-70, 1997.
20. MILORD, R.A. et al. An objective morphologic parameter to aid in the diagnosis of flat urothelial carcinoma in situ. Human Pathology, v. 32, n. 9, p. 997-1002, 2001.
21. MILLOT, C.; DUFER, J. Clinical applications of image cytometry to human tumor analysis. Histol Histopathol, v. 15, p. 1185-200, 2000.
22. NATIV, O. et al. The role of nuclear morphometry for predicting disease outcome in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma. Cancer, v. 76, n. 8, p. 1440-4, 1995.
23. ODA, Y.; TSUNEYOSHI M. A comparative study of nuclear morphometry and proliferating activity in neuroectodermal tumors of bone and Ewing's sarcoma of bone. Gen Diag Pathol, v. 141, p. 121-9, 1995.
24. PALCIC, B. Nuclear texture: can it be used as a surrogate endpoint biomarker? J Cell Biochem Suppl, v. 19, p. 40-6, 1994.
25. PANTAZOPOULOS, D. Back propagation neural network in the discrimination of benign from malignant lower urinary tract lesions. J Urol, v. 159, p. 1619-23, 1998.
26. POULIN, N. et al. Nuclear morphometry as an intermediate endpoint biomarker in chemoprevention of cervical carcinoma using α- ifluoromethylornithine. Cytometry (Commun Clin Cytom), v. 38, p. 214-23, 1999.
27. TOSI, P. et al. Nuclear morphometry as an important prognostic factor in stage I renal cell carcinoma. Cancer, v. 58, p. 2512-8, 1986.
28. UTHSCSA ImageTool version 3.0 Final is Here. Disponível em: 〈http://ddsdx.uthscsa.edu/dig/itdesc.html〉. Acesso em: 1 jul. 2007.
29. VELTRI, R.W. et al. Quantitative nuclear grade (QNG): a new image analysis-based biomarker of clinically relevant nuclear structure alterations. J Cell Biochem Suppl, v. 35, p. 151-7, 2000.
30. XU, Y.; PITOT, H. A software package to improve image quality and isolation of objects of interest for quantitative stereology studies of rat hepatocarcinogenesis. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, n. 81, p. 236-45, 2006.