Developing a Methodology for Three-Dimensional Correlation of PET–CT Images and Whole-Mount Histopathology in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding the three-dimensional (3D) volumetric relationship between imaging and functional or histopathologic heterogeneity of tumours is a key concept in the development of image-guided radiotherapy. Our aim was to develop a methodologic framework to enable the reconstruction of resected lung specimens containing non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), to register the result in 3D with diagnostic imaging, and to import the reconstruction into a radiation treatment planning system. METHODS AND RESULTS: We recruited 12 patients for an investigation of radiology-pathology correlation (RPC) in nsclc. Before resection, imaging by positron emission tomography (PET) or computed tomography (CT) was obtained. Resected specimens were formalin-fixed for 1-24 hours before sectioning at 3-mm to 10-mm intervals. To try to retain the original shape, we embedded the specimens in agar before sectioning. Consecutive sections were laid out for photography and manually adjusted to maintain shape. Following embedding, the tissue blocks underwent whole-mount sectioning (4-mum sections) and staining with hematoxylin and eosin. Large histopathology slides were used to whole-mount entire sections for digitization. The correct sequence was maintained to assist in subsequent reconstruction. Using Photoshop (Adobe Systems Incorporated, San Jose, CA, U.S.A.), contours were placed on the photographic images to represent the external borders of the section and the extent of macroscopic disease. Sections were stacked in sequence and manually oriented in Photoshop. The macroscopic tumour contours were then transferred to MATLAB (The Mathworks, Natick, MA, U.S.A.) and stacked, producing 3D surface renderings of the resected specimen and embedded gross tumour. To evaluate the microscopic extent of disease, customized "tile-based" and commercial confocal panoramic laser scanning (TISSUEscope: Biomedical Photometrics, Waterloo, ON) systems were used to generate digital images of whole-mount histopathology sections. Using the digital whole-mount images and imaging software, we contoured the gross and microscopic extent of disease. Two methods of registering pathology and imaging were used. First, selected pet and ct images were transferred into Photoshop, where they were contoured, stacked, and reconstructed. After importing the pathology and the imaging contours to MATLAB, the contours were reconstructed, manually rotated, and rigidly registered. In the second method, MATLAB tumour renderings were exported to a software platform for manual registration with the original pet and ct images in multiple planes. Data from this software platform were then exported to the Pinnacle radiation treatment planning system in DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) format. CONCLUSIONS: There is no one definitive method for 3D volumetric RPC in nsclc. An innovative approach to the 3D reconstruction of resected nsclc specimens incorporates agar embedding of the specimen and whole-mount digital histopathology. The reconstructions can be rigidly and manually registered to imaging modalities such as ct and pet and exported to a radiation treatment planning system.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".