Fig. 6.

Comparison of hand counting, NETQUANT, and semi-automated quantification for image set 2.

A shows the cell count for the control group with the semi-automated methods giving unrealistically high values for some images. Significant differences by both semi-automated and NETQUANT compared to hand counting were apparent. In B, the pattern remained similar to A, where the semi-automated method showed remarkably higher values of cell counts in several cases. C depicts NET formation values by all three methods, with the semi-automated method showing significantly higher results than both other methods in the control group, even exceeding 100% NET formation. D shows NET formation of the stimulated group where NETQUANT exhibited values within the range of hand counting, while the semi -automated method revealed significant differences. Statistical analysis was performed by Two-Way ANOVA with Dunnett correction for multiple comparison. Semi -automated and NETQUANT values were compared to hand counting. Data are given as mean ± SD. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001).