In silico modelling demonstrates that user variability during tumour measurement can affect in vivo therapeutic efficacy outcomes
Murkin, J. T.; Amos, H. E.; Brough, D. W.; Turley, K. D.
Show abstract
User measurement bias during subcutaneous tumor measurement is a source of variation in preclinical in vivo studies. We investigated whether this user variability could impact efficacy study outcomes, in the form of the false negative result rate when comparing treated and control groups. Two tumor measurement methods were compared; calipers which rely on manual measurement, and an automatic 3D and thermal imaging device. Tumor growth curve data were used to create an in silico efficacy study with control and treated groups. Before applying user variability, treatment group tumor volumes were statistically different to the control group. Utilizing data collected from 15 different users across 9 in vivo studies, user measurement variability was computed for both methods and simulation was used to investigate its impact on the in silico study outcome. User variability produced a false negative result in 3.5% to 19.5% of simulated studies when using calipers, depending on treatment efficacy. When using an imaging device with lower user variability this was reduced to 0.0% to 2.4%, demonstrating that user variability impacts study outcomes and the ability to detect treatment effect. Reducing variability in efficacy studies can increase confidence in efficacy study outcomes without altering group sizes. By using a measurement device with lower user variability, the chance of missing a therapeutic effect can be reduced and time and resources spent pursuing false results could be saved. This improvement in data quality is of particular interest in discovery and dosing studies, where being able to detect small differences between groups is crucial.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- An innovative non-invasive technique for subcutaneous tumour measurements 94%
- Classification performance bias between training and test sets in a limited mammography dataset 93%
- Use of Transabdominal Ultrasound for the Detection of Intra-Peritoneal Tumor Engraftment and Growth in Mouse Xenografts of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Large-scale crowdsourced radiotherapy segmentations across a variety of cancer anatomic sites: Interobserver expert/non-expert and multi-observer composite tumor and normal tissue delineation annotations from a prospective educational challenge 92%
- Weekly Intra-Treatment Diffusion Weighted Imaging Dataset for Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing MR-linac Treatment 91%
- Segmentation of vestibular schwannoma from MRI — An open annotated dataset and baseline algorithm 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.