Combining high wavenumber and fingerprint Raman spectroscopy for the detection of prostate cancer during radical prostatectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For prostate cancer (PCa) patients, radical prostatectomy (complete removal of the prostate) is the only curative surgical option. To date, there is no clinical technique allowing for real-time assessment of surgical margins to minimize the extent of residual cancer. Here, we present a tissue interrogation technique using a dual excitation wavelength Raman spectroscopy system capable of sequentially acquiring fingerprint (FP) and high wavenumber (HWN) Raman spectra. Results demonstrate the ability of the system to detect PCa in post-prostatectomy specimens. In total, 477 Raman spectra were collected from 18 human prostate slices. Each area measured with Raman spectroscopy was characterized as either normal or cancer based on histopathological analyses, and each spectrum was classified based on supervised learning using support vector machines (SVMs). Based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, FP (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.89) had slightly superior cancer detection capabilities compared with HWN (AUC = 0.86). Optimal performance resulted from combining the spectral information from FP and HWN (AUC = 0.91), suggesting that the use of these two spectral regions may provide complementary molecular information for PCa detection. The use of leave-one-(spectrum)-out (LOO) or leave-one-patient-out (LOPO) cross-validation produced similar classification results when combining FP with HWN. Our findings suggest that the application of machine learning using multiple data points from the same patient does not result in biases necessarily impacting the reliability of the classification models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".