MicroCT is Better than Calipers for Measuring Tumor Size in Mice
Author Information
Author(s): Mette Munk Jensen, Jesper Tranekjær Jørgensen, Tina Binderup, Andreas Kjær
Primary Institution: Cluster for Molecular Imaging, University of Copenhagen
Hypothesis
Does microCT provide more accurate and reproducible measurements of tumor size in mice compared to caliper measurements and 18F-FDG-PET?
Conclusion
MicroCT was found to be more accurate and reproducible than both caliper and 18F-FDG-PET for measuring tumor volume in mice.
Supporting Evidence
- MicroCT measurements showed no significant bias compared to reference volume.
- Caliper measurements systematically overestimated tumor size.
- Intra-observer variation was lower for microCT than for caliper measurements.
- MicroCT allowed for detection of smaller changes in tumor size.
Takeaway
MicroCT is like a super camera that takes better pictures of tumors in mice than using a ruler or another type of camera, helping doctors see how well treatments are working.
Methodology
Tumor volume was measured using microCT, 18F-FDG-PET, and external caliper in NMRI nude mice, with reference volumes determined ex vivo.
Potential Biases
Caliper measurements had systematic bias that increased with tumor size.
Limitations
The study was limited to a specific tumor model and may not generalize to all tumor types.
Participant Demographics
Six weeks old female NMRI nude mice were used in the study.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.001
Confidence Interval
95% CI on difference: -10.6-0.3 mm3 for microCT; -50.4–154.7 mm3 for PET; -10.0–200.3 mm3 for caliper.
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website