Fluorescence and reflectance device variability throughout the progression of a phase II clinical trial to detect and screen for cervical neoplasia using a fiber optic probe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large phase II trials of fluorescence and reflectance spectroscopy using a fiber optic probe in the screening and diagnostic settings for detecting cervical neoplasia have been conducted. We present accrual and histopathology data, instrumentation, data processing, and the preliminary results of interdevice consistencies throughout the progression of a trial. Patients were recruited for either a screening trial (no history of abnormal Papanicolaou smears) or a diagnostic trial (a history of abnormal Papanicolaou smears). Colposcopy identified normal and abnormal squamous, columnar, and transformation zone areas that were subsequently measured with the fiber probe and biopsied. In the course of the clinical trial, two generations of spectrometers (FastEEM2 and FastEEM3) were designed and utilized as optical instrumentation for in vivo spectroscopic fluorescence and reflectance measurements. Data processing of fluorescence and reflectance data is explained in detail and a preliminary analysis of the variability across each device and probe combination is explored. One thousand patients were recruited in the screening trial and 850 patients were recruited in the diagnostic trial. Three clinical sites attracted a diverse range of patients of different ages, ethnicities, and menopausal status. The fully processed results clearly show that consistencies exist across all device and probe combinations throughout the diagnostic trial. Based on the stratification of the data, the results also show identifiable differences in mean intensity between normal and high-grade tissue diagnosis, pre- and postmenopausal status, and squamous and columnar tissue type. The mean intensity values of stratified data show consistent separation across each of the device and probe combinations. By analyzing trial spectra, we provide more evidence that biographical variables such as menopausal status as well as tissue type and diagnosis significantly affect the data. Understanding these effects will lead to better modeling parameters when analyzing the performance of fluorescence and reflectance spectroscopy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".