Summary of Results: Colposcopy sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratio values.

<p>LG threshold for positive diagnosis by colposcopy was used; LR+ = positive likelihood ratio, LR– = negative likelihood ratio;</p><p>^†Obtained as part of the study.</p><p>Summary of Results: Colposcopy sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratio values.</p

Patient inclusion criteria.

<p>Patient inclusion criteria.</p

Percentage of proliferating cells in the full thickness of the epithelium for normal epithelium, LGSILs, and HGSILs for non-smokers and smokers.

<p>Factorial ANOVA/<i>post hoc</i> Fisher LSD testing revealed the following results when comparing results from non-smokers vs. smokers: for cases negative for disease, p = 0.75; for LGSILs, p = 0.94; and for HGSILs, p = 0.049.</p

Spatial analysis of Mib1-stained cervical biopsies.

<p>We present: (A) an unprocessed, stained cervical biopsy cross section; (B) basal and superficial membranes that were first manually delineated by a technician through simple thresholding followed by automated segmentation of all nuclei, which generated candidate cell’s nuclear centers of gravity; (C) Mib1-positive nuclei that were identified manually by the technician (green dots) and Voronoi diagrams that were generated based on those centers of gravity; (D) the basal layer (bottom of panel) containing all nuclei whose associated Voronoi polygons intersected with the basal membrane; (E) layer 1 (the parabasal layer); and (F) successive layers that were incrementally calculated.</p

Results for Mib1-stained biopsy specimens (including stratification based on histopathological review of an individual biopsy specimen [“Biopsy Diagnosis”]; worst disease grade observed amongst multiple biopsies from a single patient [i.e. “Worst Patient Diagnosis”]; and infection status for High Risk HPV types [i.e. the 13 high risk types defined within the Hybrid Capture II system]).

<p>Results for Mib1-stained biopsy specimens (including stratification based on histopathological review of an individual biopsy specimen [“Biopsy Diagnosis”]; worst disease grade observed amongst multiple biopsies from a single patient [i.e. “Worst Patient Diagnosis”]; and infection status for High Risk HPV types [i.e. the 13 high risk types defined within the Hybrid Capture II system]).</p

Average percentage of proliferating cells in the first layers of cervical epithelium.

<p>In all panels, layers 0 and 1 represent the basal and parabasal layers, respectively. A) Percentage of proliferating cells in the first seven layers of cervical epithelium as assessed for each pathology grade. B) Percentage of proliferating cells in the first seven layers of cervical epithelium for normal and CIN1 tissues based on high-risk HPV type infection status. C) Percentage of proliferating cells in the first six layers of epithelium of non-smokers, where LGSILs represent CIN1 lesions and HGSILs represent CIN2/3 lesions. D) Same representation as C), only results presented are for patients with smoking histories.</p

Proportion of Mib1-positive cells (i.e. proliferating cells) in the four diagnostic groups.

<p>The mid-point represents the median value; boxes represent the 25th percentiles; and whiskers represent the 95^th percentiles. Once again, factorial ANOVA testing was followed by a <i>post hoc</i> Fisher LSD test for group-by-group comparisons, yielding: p = 0.0006 for a normal vs. CIN1 comparison; p = 0.017 for a normal CIN1 vs. CIN2 comparison; and p = 0.00001 for a CIN2 vs. CIN3 comparison.</p

Mean value of epithelial thickness (µm), number of layers, and percentage of proliferating cells according to histopathological diagnosis (with standard deviations represented in parentheses.

<p>Mean value of epithelial thickness (µm), number of layers, and percentage of proliferating cells according to histopathological diagnosis (with standard deviations represented in parentheses.</p

Percentage of proliferating cells – mean and (Standard Deviation) – in the first eight layers of cervical epithelium according to histopathology diagnosis.

<p>Detailed methods for delineating epithelial layers are found in Materials and Methods, <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0107088#pone-0107088-g001" target="_blank">Fig. 1</a>.</p><p>Percentage of proliferating cells – mean and (Standard Deviation) – in the first eight layers of cervical epithelium according to histopathology diagnosis.</p

Showing the correlation between a linear discriminant function score (Texture Score) based entirely on only texture phenotype features measured of the nuclei in formalin fixed quantitatively stained sections of biopsied tissue 39

The error bars represent the 5and 95percentiles; the box represents the central 50percentile and the solid square the mean of the distribution of the scores for measured sections with the noted histopathological diagnosis. The numbers over the boxes are the number of samples measured for the specific diagnosis.<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Up regulation in gene expression of chromatin remodelling factors in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/9/64</p><p>BMC Genomics 2008;9():64-64.</p><p>Published online 4 Feb 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2277413.</p><p></p