These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Case diagnosis as positive identification in prostatic neoplasia.
    Author: Montironi R, Mazzucchelli R, Santinelli A, Hamilton PW, Thompson D, Bartels PH.
    Journal: Anal Quant Cytol Histol; 1998 Oct; 20(5):424-36. PubMed ID: 9801761.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To apply a distance measure and Bayesian belief network-based methodology to the positive identification of case diagnosis in prostatic neoplasia. STUDY DESIGN: Eight morphologic and cellular features were analyzed in 20 cases of normal prostate, 20 of low grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN), 20 of high grade PIN, 20 of prostatic adenocarcinoma with a cribriform pattern and 20 of prostatic adenocarcinoma with an acinar pattern. The diagnostic distance was evaluated to measure the "extent" to which the feature outcomes of the individual cases differed from the expected profile of outcomes in typical cases of normal prostate, low and high grade PIN, and cribriform and large acinar adenocarcinoma. Belief values were evaluated with a Bayesian belief network (BBN). RESULTS: A bivariate representation of the cumulative absolute diagnostic distances of all the cases from the prototypes of normal prostate and cribriform adenocarcinoma was made. Three separate groups of cases were observed, corresponding to normal prostate, low grade PIN and cribriform adenocarcinoma. An additional group was formed by the cases of high grade PIN and acinar adenocarcinoma--i.e., there was complete overlap between the diagnostic distance values of cases belonging to these two categories. However, these cases showed differences in clue outcomes. To explore the contribution of such observations to case identification, a bivariate representation of the diagnostic distances from high grade PIN and acinar adenocarcinoma was made. The cases then formed five separate groups corresponding to the five diagnostic categories. When the individual cases were considered, their shortest distance was from the prototype of the category into which they were originally diagnosed. The BBN gave these diagnostic categories the highest belief values. CONCLUSION: The combined evaluation of diagnostic distance and belief represents an identification procedure. The numeric value of certainty characterizes individual cases according to the level of progression from PIN toward cancer.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]