Fig 1.
In vivo-images of orthotopically growing xenografts in the murine brain acquired using a clinical CT scanner (left row), a micro-CT scanner (middle row), and the corresponding histological sections (right row, H&E staining).
Exemplary, tumors of different sizes and with different patterns of contrast agent uptake are shown. A) Large tumor with homogeneous contrast enhancement. B) Ring enhancement of another large tumor corresponding with central tumor necrosis. C) Small tumor. D) Middle-sized tumor with strong and homogeneous contrast enhancement.
Fig 2.
A) Tumor volumes measured by micro-CT, clinical CT, and histology for each reader separately. Within each modality, between reader volume analyses was similar (micro-CT p = 0.441, clinical CT p = 0.173, histology p = 0.161). Moreover, volume analysis was similar between micro-CT and clinical CT (reader 1: p = 0.813). Tumor volumes measured by histology were significantly smaller compared to both micro-CT (reader 1: p = 0.012) and clinical CT (reader 1: 0.012), respectively. Boxes indicate 25% and 75% quantiles, horizontal lines in boxes indicate median values, vertical bars indicate minimum and maximum, circles indicate measured tumor volumes. B) Correlation between tumor volumes as measured by clinical CT and micro-CT by two independent readers (circles for reader 1 and triangles for reader 2).