To find the missing number in the given table, we need to identify a consistent pattern between the numbers in each row. Let's examine the given rows and determine how they might be related.
We start by analyzing the first row:
```
18, 11, 39
```
We observe that:
[tex]\[ 18 + 11 + (2 \times 11) = 18 + 11 + 22 = 51 \][/tex]
The third number in the first row, 39, is not equal to 51. Thus, it seems the pattern should be refined or another pattern considered.
Continuing with the refined analysis:
If we instead look at the difference and sum, still doesn’t correlate, let's check the second row for consistency:
```
15, 7, 26
```
We analyze as we did:
[tex]\[ 15 + 7 + (2 \times 7) = 15 + 7 + 14 = 36 \][/tex]
Here too, the result does not match 26.
Now, noticing that applying the pattern from another type, likely considering or looking for hidden consistency:
Taking another approach, such refined consignment may be:
```
18 + 21 = 39
15 + 11 = 26
```
If that may reflect a repeated addition of simpler correlation hence deriving the third one:
For the third row:
[tex]\[ 12 + 12 = 24 \][/tex]
Hence, concluding by adding in similar fashion, the missing number will be:
24
Thus, given the alternatives:
(A) 10
(B) 12
(C) 14
(D) 16
The consistent pattern throughout the rows fits the number:
[tex]\[ \boxed{24} \][/tex]
