The systematic interpretation of lymph nodes is described in detail in Tables 2 and 3. Depending on the level of SUVmax, also normal-appearing lymph nodes can be categorised as intermediate grade, and vice versa, morphologically aberrant lymph nodes with just a slight increase in SUVmax are categorised as high grade according to Tables 2 and 3.
Both of these metrics fit the interpretation of central nodes as being chemical flow routers.
Interpretation of lymph nodes based on morphology and size on CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis can also be difficult and might give false-negative results in up to 30% of cases, making the differentiation between stages I and IIA (retroperitoneal node involvement <2cm diameter) unreliable[ 47, 49, 50 ].
During interpretation of sentinel lymph nodes, the diagnosis of melanoma is known and the aim is to detect the melanoma micrometastases of the known primary.
Thus, a highly sensitive immunomarker such as S-100 is less effective for interpretation of sentinel lymph nodes for melanoma micrometastases (especially when present as single cells) than MART-1 and Melan-A [ 6].
On the basis of this interpretation, the centrality of node i is expressed as.
However, even with a qualified set of nodes, the interpretation of the results can still be affected by the way the RF measurements are realized.
In this paper the number of internal nodes is used as an measure of tree size or complexity, as for our application it is a more interesting interpretation than the total number of nodes.
Although the co-expression network separates different super-clusters, interpretation of connections among the nodes remained intractable due to the large size of this network.
If the primary melanoma is non-immunoreactive for 'the cocktail', the negative interpretation of the sentinel lymph nodes with cocktail in this situation may be confirmed with other suitable immunomarker to which the primary melanoma is immunoreactive.
