No abstract

BackgroundLight microscopy is of central importance in cell biology. The recent introduction of automated high content screening has expanded this technology towards automation of experiments and performing large scale perturbation assays. Nevertheless, evaluation of microscopy data continues to be a bottleneck in many projects. Currently, among open source software, CellProfiler and its extension Analyst are widely used in automated image processing. Even though revolutionizing image analysis in current biology, some routine and many advanced tasks are either not supported or require programming skills of the researcher. This represents a significant obstacle in many biology laboratories.ResultsWe have developed a tool, Enhanced CellClassifier, which circumvents this obstacle. Enhanced CellClassifier starts from images analyzed by CellProfiler, and allows multi-class classification using a Support Vector Machine algorithm. Training of objects can be done by clicking directly "on the microscopy image" in several intuitive training modes. Many routine tasks like out-of focus exclusion and well summary are also supported. Classification results can be integrated with other object measurements including inter-object relationships. This makes a detailed interpretation of the image possible, allowing the differentiation of many complex phenotypes. For the generation of the output, image, well and plate data are dynamically extracted and summarized. The output can be generated as graphs, Excel-files, images with projections of the final analysis and exported as variables.ConclusionHere we describe Enhanced CellClassifier which allows multiple class classification, elucidating complex phenotypes. Our tool is designed for the biologist who wants both, simple and flexible analysis of images without requiring programming skills. This should facilitate the implementation of automated high-content screening.

The aim of the S3-guideline melanoma contains recommendations on diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of cutaneous melanoma in its primary, limited locoregional and metastatic stages. Mucosal and uveal melanomas are not considered. Questions on early recognition have been considered in the S3-guideline on prevention of skin cancer. Objectives and formulation of questionsThe aim of the S3-guideline melanoma is to provide physicians in office and clinical practice in the field of oncology an accepted, evidence-based decision-making aid for the selection and performance of suitable measures for diagnostics, therapy and follow-up of cutaneous melanoma. The systematic presentation of study results with respect to benefits and risks are intended to support physicians as well as patients in their decision-making.The basis of the recommendations is a review of available evidence according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine, the adaptation of available evidence-based international guidelines as well as in the event of lack of evidence on the basis of good clinical practice. All recommendations were evaluated by interdisciplinary representatives and consented.The guideline should set quality standards and thus in the long term improve care of melanoma patients. Addressees and duration of validityThe S3-guideline melanoma is directed at dermatologists, family physicians, internists, general practitioners, gynecologists, surgeons, oncologists, radiologists and radiation therapists in inpatient and outpatient settings and other medical specialties involved in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cutaneous melanoma. The guideline is also directed at affected patients and their family members. Further, it should serve as orientation for health insurance providers and political decision makers.The maximum duration of validity stipulated by the AWMF is five years. A modular update in yearly intervals is planned.In 2015 an update of the entire guideline is planned with a designation of new mandate holders.The recommendations were developed on the basis of key questions that were agreed upon at the start in a kick-off meeting by the mandate holders. Evidence-based recommendations: Statement of evidence level (quality level of evidence) as well as grade of recommendation (inclusion of the clinical evaluation) and strength of consensus.Basis: adaptation of source guidelines or systematic search of the literature de-novo. Non-evidence-based recommendations: A smaller share of recommendations was not evidence-based but based on GCP (Good Clinical Practice), strength of consensus, no level of evidence, no grade of recommendation.

No abstract

Tumour patients are subject to different degrees of psychosocial distress depending on the course of disease, personality variables and amount of social support available. Often patients do not spontaneously talk about their distress and attending physicians fail to detect it. Therefore, it is important that the presence of distress is ascertained by specific screening instruments so that appropriate supportive measures can be instituted. The Hornheide Questionnaire (HQ) employed for investigating the need for psychosocial support in the case of patients with skin tumours and with tumours in the head and neck region represents such a specific screening instrument. The present study investigates the validity of the HQ on the basis of two representative samples from two different University Clinics for treatment and follow-ups of melanoma patients. With the help of the HQ, 215 patients at the Dermatology Out-patient Unit of the University of Innsbruck and 223 patients at the University of Freiburg were investigated with regard to their subjective experience of distress. The external constructive validity criteria were established on the basis of the Freiburg Questionnaire of Disease-Coping, the questionnaire of social support and Beck's Depression Inventory. There were significant differences between individuals in the severity of distress in different age groups and in patients in different tumour stages. The internal consistency of the HQ and its subscales proved to be satisfactory demarcation from other psychosocial dimensions and an adequate correlation with similar dimensions (depression, depressive illness coping, social support, compliance). The HQ appears to be an economical and valid screening instrument for detecting the need for psychosocial support in melanoma patients in the out-patient follow-up stage.