. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 May 1.

Published in final edited form as: NMR Biomed. 2013 Feb 25;26(5):519–532. doi: 10.1002/nbm.2888

TABLE 2.

The spatial percentage overlap of perfused, hypoxic, and necrotic tumor areas obtained by GMM-based classification with those obtained from Ak_ep, pimonidazole, and H&E images

Tumor slices	% overlap of perfused area (OL1, OL2)		% overlap of hypoxic area (OL1, OL2)		% overlap of necrotic area
Tumor slices	% overlap of perfused area (OL1, OL2)		% overlap of hypoxic area (OL1, OL2)		H&E (OL1, OL2)		Extended (OL1, OL2)
Tumor 1 (478 mm³)	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-
Tumor 2 (503 mm³)	1	0.98	-	-	-	-	-	-
Tumor 3 (sl.1, 1240 mm³):Training	0.90	0.81	0.70	0.36	0.58	0.56	0.50	0.91
Tumor 3 (sl.2, 1240 mm³)	0.88	0.93	0.78	0.59	0.92	0.20	0.71	0.91
Tumor 3 (sl.3, 1240 mm³ mm³)	0.80	0.75	0.82	0.42	1	0.10	0.65	0.91
Tumor 4 (sl.1, 870 mm³)	0.86	0.88	0.67	0.75	0.72	0.57	0.57	0.77
Tumor 4 (sl.2, 870 mm³)	0.81	0.93	0.65	0.55	0.47	0.41	0.59	0.78
Tumor 5 (sl.1, 744 mm³)	0.71	0.53	0.51	0.45	0.60	0.50	0.41	0.84
Tumor 5 (sl.2, 744 mm³)	1	0.30	0.57	0.41	0.64	0.20	0.64	0.89
Tumor 6 (2530 mm³)	0.74	0.60	0.37	0.20	0.78	0.17	0.61	0.87
Mean±SD	0.84± 0.09	0.72± 0.23	0.64± 0.15	0.48± 0.16	0.72± 0.17	0.34± 0.19	0.58± 0.09	0.86± 0.09

Necrotic areas identified based on GMM-classification were compared to necrotic areas identified from H&E images alone or to necrotic areas corrected for unassigned voxels with no significant CA uptake and pimonidazole staining (Extended).