Comparison of two quantitative methods of discerning airspace enlargement in smoke-exposed mice.
In this work, we compare two methods for evaluating and quantifying pulmonary airspace enlargement in a mouse model of chronic cigarette smoke exposure. Standard stereological sample preparation, sectioning, and imaging of mouse lung tissues were performed for semi-automated acquisition of mean linear intercept (L(m)) data. After completion of the L(m) measurements, D(2), a metric of airspace enlargement, was measured in a blinded manner on the same lung images using a fully automated technique developed in-house. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows that although L(m) was able to separate the smoke-exposed and control groups with statistical significance (p = 0.034), D(2) was better able to differentiate the groups (p<0.001) and did so without any overlap between the control and smoke-exposed individual animal data. In addition, the fully automated implementation of D(2) represented a time savings of at least 24x over semi-automated L(m) measurements. Although D(2) does not provide 3D stereological metrics of airspace dimensions as L(m) does, results show that it has higher sensitivity and specificity for detecting the subtle airspace enlargement one would expect to find in mild or early stage emphysema. Therefore, D(2) may serve as a more accurate screening measure for detecting early lung disease than L(m).
Jacob
Richard E
RE
Biological Monitoring and Modeling, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA. richard.jacob@pnl.gov
Carson
James P
JP
Gideon
Kathy M
KM
Amidan
Brett G
BG
Smith
Cathie L
CL
Lee
K Monica
KM
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D000818:Animals; D005260:Female; D008168:Lung / Q000033:anatomy & histology*; D051379:Mice; D008806:Mice, Inbred AKR; D012906:Smoke
D012906:Smoke
Dev Dyn. 2005 Apr;232(4):1079-90
15739229
Thorax. 1967 Nov;22(6):483-96
5624577
Am J Pathol. 2003 Dec;163(6):2329-35
14633606
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003 Sep 1;168(5):516-21
12941655
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2008 Oct;105(4):1291-300
18719237
J Appl Physiol. 1973 Mar;34(3):344-50
4688125
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2006 Jan;100(1):186-93
16166240
Inhal Toxicol. 2007 Apr;19(4):361-76
17365041
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2000 Apr;278(4):L822-9
10749760
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2004 Jul;97(1):204-12
15020580
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2008 Dec;105(6):1980-1
18719230
Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2004 Jun 25;140(3):283-91
15186789
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1985 Jul;132(1):182-5
4014865
Mod Pathol. 2003 Jan;16(1):1-7
12527706
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994 Nov;163(5):1017-25
7976869
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2006 Apr;100(4):1419-20; author reply 1420-1
16540717
Toxicol Sci. 1999 Oct;51(2):289-99
10543031
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2007 Jan;102(1):459-67
16973815
Eur Respir J. 2001 Oct;18(4):720-30
11716178
Chest. 1971 Jun;59(6):592-9
4325923
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2006 Apr;100(4):1421-2
16646137
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999 Mar;159(3):851-6
10051262
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006 Mar 15;173(6):623-31
16387805
COPD. 2005 Sep;2(3):303-10
17146995
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995 Nov;152(5 Pt 2):S77-121
7582322
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2008 Mar;104(3):773-86
18063806
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Feb 13;104(7):2361-5
17284608