MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112395929 · doi:10.1186/s12938-015-0093-6

Quantification of confocal fluorescence microscopy for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

2015· article· en· W2112395929 on OpenAlexafffund
Fahime Sheikhzadeh, Rabab Ward, Anita Carraro, Zhao Yang Chen, Dirk van Niekerk, Dianne Miller, Tom Ehlen, Calum MacAulay, Michele Follen, Pierre Lane, Martial Guillaud

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMedical Engineering OnLine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConfocalCervical intraepithelial neoplasiaConfocal microscopyDysplasiaPathologyCervical cancerMedicineFluorescence microscopeFluorescenceBiologyCancerOpticsInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer remains a major health problem, especially in developing countries. Colposcopic examination is used to detect high-grade lesions in patients with a history of abnormal pap smears. New technologies are needed to improve the sensitivity and specificity of this technique. We propose to test the potential of fluorescence confocal microscopy to identify high-grade lesions. METHODS: We examined the quantification of ex vivo confocal fluorescence microscopy to differentiate among normal cervical tissue, low-grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN), and high-grade CIN. We sought to (1) quantify nuclear morphology and tissue architecture features by analyzing images of cervical biopsies; and (2) determine the accuracy of high-grade CIN detection via confocal microscopy relative to the accuracy of detection by colposcopic impression. Forty-six biopsies obtained from colposcopically normal and abnormal cervical sites were evaluated. Confocal images were acquired at different depths from the epithelial surface and histological images were analyzed using in-house software. RESULTS: The features calculated from the confocal images compared well with those features obtained from the histological images and histopathological reviews of the specimens (obtained by a gynecologic pathologist). The correlations between two of these features (the nuclear-cytoplasmic ratio and the average of three nearest Delaunay-neighbors distance) and the grade of dysplasia were higher than that of colposcopic impression. The sensitivity of detecting high-grade dysplasia by analysing images collected at the surface of the epithelium, and at 15 and 30 μm below the epithelial surface were respectively 100, 100, and 92 %. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative analysis of confocal fluorescence images showed its capacity for discriminating high-grade CIN lesions vs. low-grade CIN lesions and normal tissues, at different depth of imaging. This approach could be used to help clinicians identify high-grade CIN in clinical settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMedical Engineering OnLineSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207