Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWilson, Malcolm S
dc.contributor.authorWest, Catharine M L
dc.contributor.authorWilson, George D
dc.contributor.authorRoberts, Stephen A
dc.contributor.authorJames, Roger D
dc.contributor.authorSchofield, Philip F
dc.date.accessioned2010-05-28T11:41:19Z
dc.date.available2010-05-28T11:41:19Z
dc.date.issued1993-04
dc.identifier.citationAn assessment of the reliability and reproducibility of measurement of potential doubling times (Tpot) in human colorectal cancers. 1993, 67 (4):754-9 Br. J. Canceren
dc.identifier.issn0007-0920
dc.identifier.pmid8471432
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/99977
dc.description.abstractAn assessment has been made of the reproducibility of measuring tumour proliferation using in vivo iododeoxyuridine (IUdR) labelling and flow cytometry. The variation that occurs between different institutions (Paterson Institute for Cancer Research, Manchester and the Gray Laboratory, Northwood), different observers and different runs on the same flow cytometer have been measured on 139 samples from 53 patients with colorectal cancer. The results demonstrate that the IUdR technique for measuring tumour proliferation is reproducible. Correlations were seen between measurements of Tpot obtained by different individuals and on separate machines. However, direct comparisons of the measured parameters showed that there were highly significant differences in the values obtained between institutes and observers (P < 0.001). Despite these variations, there were still significant detectable differences in Tpot measurements between individual tumours (P < 0.001). Analysis of the results obtained by running the same samples on two separate occasions on the same machine showed that the technique was highly reproducible and that the staining procedure was stable. Eighty per cent of the samples were similarly assigned to either above or below the median Tpot value, regardless which observer/laboratory combination was utilised. These data suggest that large clinical trials using Tpot should employ a single centre and a single individual to prepare, run and analyse samples.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectColorectal Canceren
dc.subjectCancer DNAen
dc.subject.meshAdenocarcinoma
dc.subject.meshCell Cycle
dc.subject.meshCell Division
dc.subject.meshColorectal Neoplasms
dc.subject.meshDNA, Neoplasm
dc.subject.meshFlow Cytometry
dc.subject.meshHumans
dc.subject.meshIdoxuridine
dc.subject.meshObserver Variation
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of Results
dc.subject.meshTime Factors
dc.titleAn assessment of the reliability and reproducibility of measurement of potential doubling times (Tpot) in human colorectal cancers.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentClinical Research Department, Christie Hospital, Manchester, UK.en
dc.identifier.journalBritish Journal of Canceren
html.description.abstractAn assessment has been made of the reproducibility of measuring tumour proliferation using in vivo iododeoxyuridine (IUdR) labelling and flow cytometry. The variation that occurs between different institutions (Paterson Institute for Cancer Research, Manchester and the Gray Laboratory, Northwood), different observers and different runs on the same flow cytometer have been measured on 139 samples from 53 patients with colorectal cancer. The results demonstrate that the IUdR technique for measuring tumour proliferation is reproducible. Correlations were seen between measurements of Tpot obtained by different individuals and on separate machines. However, direct comparisons of the measured parameters showed that there were highly significant differences in the values obtained between institutes and observers (P < 0.001). Despite these variations, there were still significant detectable differences in Tpot measurements between individual tumours (P < 0.001). Analysis of the results obtained by running the same samples on two separate occasions on the same machine showed that the technique was highly reproducible and that the staining procedure was stable. Eighty per cent of the samples were similarly assigned to either above or below the median Tpot value, regardless which observer/laboratory combination was utilised. These data suggest that large clinical trials using Tpot should employ a single centre and a single individual to prepare, run and analyse samples.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record