090 24.380 0.003 0.130 CO-OCCURENCE Temsirolimus mw MATRIX PARAMETERS         Contrast S(2,0) 19.563 41.264 0.011 0.001 Contrast S(2,2) 23.139 43.325 0.006 <0,001 Contrast S(3,0) 22.618 45.195 0.009 0.001 Correlation S(3,0) 21.555 40.965 0.007 0.001 Sum average S(3,0)

28.935 19.345 0.033 0.035 Contrast S(3,3) 23.282 48.345 0.006 <0,001 Correlation S(3,3) 22.095 44.779 0.007 <0,001 Sum average S(3,-3) 20.384 0.353 0.087 0.017 Contrast S(4,0) 26.599 44.458 0.007 0.001 Contrast S(4,4) 31.083 41.015 0.009 <0,001 Correlation S(4,4) 23.823 42.301 0.007 <0,001 Sum of squares S(4,4) 82.108 0.686 0.345 0.687 Correlation S(5,-5) 39.239 25.122 0.023 0.035 RUN-LENGTH MATRIX PARAMETERS         Short run emphasis, 90° 10.659 12.516 0.001 <0,001 Grey level nonuniformity, 45° 15.649 11.529 0.001 <0,001 ABSOLUTE GRADIENT PARAMETERS         Mean 18.036 44.271 0.002 0.001 Skewness 63.599 15.598 0.046 0.007 Texture parameters are given in rows. In the columns R&R repeatability and reproducibility of total, and Wilcoxon test for fat saturation series grouped with image slice thickness less than 8 mm, and 8 mm or thicker. R&R inverted ratio and the small difference selleck kinase inhibitor Between values are associated with poor results in Wilcoxon test with certain exceptions. Comparisons between first and third imaging points achieved significant Wilcoxon test p-values most consistently:

Talazoparib within T2-weighted images in both slice thickness groups, and within T1-weighted images in the group of thinner slices. Features ranked in T1-weighted image data were tested in T2-weighted image data and vice versa. These tests with ranked features transposed with T1- and

T2-weighted image groups lead to statistically relevant p-values in thinner T1-weighted images and all images in T2-weighted group. In the analyses of first many and second imaging timepoints thin slices in general achieved poorer separation than thick slices. Between the second and third imaging sessions Wilcoxon test gave an unsatisfactory result in T1-weighted group. This trend can be seen in the B11 classification results in the framework of T1-weighted images, while the T2-weighted image analyses in B11 show better classification between second and third than first and second imaging points. The best overall discrimination between imaging timepoints in T1-weighted images was given by the run-length matrix parameters describing grey level non-uniformity, run-length non-uniformity, short-run emphasis and fraction of image in runs in one or more directions calculated (horizontal, vertical, 45 degrees and 135 degrees). In the framework of T2-weighted image analyses best the performers were absolute gradient mean and grey level non-uniformity There were some scattering in well acquitted parameters between sub analyses.