Diffuse optical imaging for monitoring treatment response in breast cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The necessity for a non-invasive and inexpensive imaging modality to both diagnose and monitor treatment response has lead to renewed interest in the potential of optical imaging. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential of diffuse optical spectroscopy for monitoring of patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Fifteen women receiving neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer had the affected breast scanned 5 times: before, 1 week, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks following initiation of the treatment and prior to surgery. Data was collected using a commercial optical system at four different wavelengths (690 nm, 730 nm, 780 nm, and 830 nm) and used to create three dimensional tomographic images. Mean measured values of deoxyhemoglobin (Hb), oxyhemoglobin (HbO(2)), and water in the entire breast were obtained and integrated over the entire breast volume to calculate the integrated optical index for each parameter. Volume-of-interest weighted tissue Hb, HbO(2), and water corresponding to the tumor were also calculated. Patient response to the treatment was evaluated from clinical and pathological response using whole-mount pathology after mastectomy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".