@article {Binks654, author = {S Binks and C A Clelland and C Layton}, title = {A comparison of pathological methods of measuring lung cancer volume.}, volume = {49}, number = {8}, pages = {654--656}, year = {1996}, doi = {10.1136/jcp.49.8.654}, publisher = {BMJ Publishing Group}, abstract = {AIM: To determine which of several pathological methods of measuring lung cancer volume compared most favourably with the gold standard. METHODS: Three pathological methods were used on 54 resected lung cancers: (1) measuring the maximum dimension and assuming a spherical shape; (2) measuring three dimensions and assuming an ellipsoidal shape; and (3) deriving the volume from the area of tumour on sequential 1 cm slices using a photocopier and an image analysis system. The gold standard was obtained from the area of whole mount tumour sections on sequential 0.1 cm slices of eight cancers. RESULTS: Volumes derived from 1 cm lung slices gave results closest to our gold standard but assuming tumours were ellipsoidal was only a slightly less accurate and less time consuming method. Assuming cancers were spherical resulted in gross overestimation of the tumour volumes. CONCLUSIONS: For practical purposes, it is reasonable to measure three dimensions of a lung tumour at sectioning and calculate the volume using the formula for an ellipsoid (V = 4/3 pi d.e.f, where d, e and f are the semi-axes).}, issn = {0021-9746}, URL = {https://jcp.bmj.com/content/49/8/654}, eprint = {https://jcp.bmj.com/content/49/8/654.full.pdf}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Pathology} }