Follicular Lesions with Papillary Nuclear Characteristics: Differences in Chromatin Detected by Computerized Image Analysis

Coelho, Bárbara Parente; Valentim, Flávia de Oliveira; Miot, Hélio Amante; Jaune, Danilo Takeshi Abe; Hayashi, Caroline Yuki; Oliveira, Cristiano Claudino de; Marques, Mariângela de Alencar; Tagliarini, José Vicente; Castilho, Emanuel Celice; Soares, Paula; Mazeto, Gláucia Maria Ferreira da Silva

doi:10.20945/2359-3997000000282

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Brief Report • Arch. Endocrinol. Metab. 64 (5) • Sep-Oct 2020 • https://doi.org/10.20945/2359-3997000000282 copy

Follicular Lesions with Papillary Nuclear Characteristics: Differences in Chromatin Detected by Computerized Image Analysis

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Objective:

Follicular lesions of the thyroid with papillary carcinoma nuclear characteristics are classified as infiltrative follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma-FVPTC (IFVPTC), encapsulated/well demarcated FVPTC with tumour capsular invasion (IEFVPTC), and the newly described category “non-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features” (NIFTP) formerly known as non-invasive encapsulated FVPTC. This study evaluated whether computerized image analysis can detect nuclear differences between these three tumour subtypes.

Materials and methods:

Slides with histological material from 15 cases of NIFTP and 33 cases of FVPTC subtypes (22 IEFVPTC, and 11 IFVPTC) were analyzed using the Image J image processing program. Tumour cells were compared for both nuclear morphometry and chromatin textural characteristics.

Results:

Nuclei from NIFTP and IFVPTC tumours differed in terms of chromatin textural features (grey intensity): mean (92.37 ± 21.01 vs 72.99 ± 14.73, p = 0.02), median (84.93 ± 21.17 vs 65.18 ± 17.08, p = 0.02), standard deviation (47.77 ± 9.55 vs 39.39 ± 7.18; p = 0.02), and coefficient of variation of standard deviation (19.96 ± 4.01 vs 24.75 ± 3.31; p = 0.003). No differences were found in relation to IEFVPTC.

Conclusion:

Computerized image analysis revealed differences in nuclear texture between NIFTP and IFVPTC, but not for IEFVPTC.

Keywords
Carcinoma, Papillary, Follicular; Cell nucleus; Histology; Thyroid neoplasms

Parameter	Tumors			P
Parameter	NIFTP (n = 15)	IEFVPTC (n = 22)	IFVPTC (n = 11)	P
Area (µm²)^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	57.38 ± 15.98	64.46 ± 18.95	53.61 ± 14.24	0.58
Mean gray intensity^* * Mean ± standard deviation. ^† † Expressed in a scale of 256 shades of grey, in which higher numbers mean lighter nuclei (0 = black; 255 = white).	92.37 ± 21.01^b	81.72 ± 21.3	72.99 ± 14.73^a	0.02
STDEV^* * Mean ± standard deviation. ^† † Expressed in a scale of 256 shades of grey, in which higher numbers mean lighter nuclei (0 = black; 255 = white).	47.77 ± 9.55^b	44.51 ± 8.22	39.39 ± 7.18^a	0.02
Perimeter (µm)^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	30.86 ± 4.65	31.7 ± 4.95	29.57 ± 3.34	0.48
Circularity^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	0.77 (0.69; 0.89)	0.84 (0.74; 0,87)	0.81 (0.71; 0.87)	0.52
Feret (µm)^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	10.81 ± 1.65	11.18 ± 1.58	10.56 ± 1.0	0.68
Median gray intensity^* * Mean ± standard deviation. ^† † Expressed in a scale of 256 shades of grey, in which higher numbers mean lighter nuclei (0 = black; 255 = white).	84.93 ± 21.17^b	73.05 ± 20.8	65.18 ± 17.08^a	0.02
AR^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	1.37 (1.24; 1.43)	1.31 (1.26; 1.36)	1.33 (1.27; 1.59)	0.73
Roundness^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	0.73 (0.71; 0.81)	0.76 (0.74; 0.8)	0.76 (0.63; 0.79)	0.76
Solidity^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	0.9 (0.88; 0.95)	0.93 (0.9; 0.95)	0.92 (0.89; 0.94)	0.37
Fractal^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	2.46 ± 0.04	2.46 ± 0.03	2.44 ± 0.04	0.28
Entropy^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	4.62 ± 0.62	4.76 ± 0.48	4.51 ± 0.89	0.67
Perimeter/Area (µm⁻¹)^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	0.5 (0.48; 0.68)	0.49 (0.46; 0.55)	0.56 (0.48; 0.66)	0.18
RA^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	99.49 ± 19.16^a	110.15 ± 21.07	115.66 ± 20.47^b	0.05
Area/Feret (µm)^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	5.63 (4.29; 5.92)	5.9 (4.91; 6.33)	4.77 (4.58; 5.97)	0.18
Gray intensity/Area (units/µm⁻²)^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	0.14 (0.12; 0.18)	0.12 (0.11; 0.15)	0.12 (0.12; 0.15)	0.15
CV – Mean intensity^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	21.45 (19.53; 24.27)	21.95 (20.31; 26.46)	22.63 (20.47; 26.26)	0.45
CV-STDEV^* * Mean ± standard deviation.	19.96 ± 4.01^a	22.34 ± 4.08	24.75 ± 3.31b	0.003
CV – Median Intensity^ Median (percentile 25; percentile 75).	26.86 (23.22; 30.76)	26.63 (24.25; 36.01)	28.13 (25.62; 33.75)	0.46

Sociedade Brasileira de Endocrinologia e Metabologia Rua Botucatu, 572 - Conjuntos 81/83, 04023-061 São Paulo SP Brasil, Tel: (55 11) 5575-0311 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: aem.editorial.office@endocrino.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Correspondence to: Gláucia Maria Ferreira da Silva Mazeto, Departamento de Medicina Interna, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Universidade Estadual de São Paulo (Unesp) Distrito de Rubião Júnior, s/n 18618-970 – Botucatu, SP, Brasil. g.mazeto@unesp.br