MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946045100 · doi:10.1117/1.jbo.24.5.056002

Intraoperative photoacoustic screening of breast cancer: a new perspective on malignancy visualization and surgical guidance

2019· article· en· W2946045100 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivan Kosik, Muriel Brackstone, Anat Kornecki, Astrid Chamson-Reig, Philip Wong, Morteza Araghi, Jeffrey J. L. Carson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLawson Health Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLondon Health Sciences CentreLawson Health Research Institute
KeywordsLumpectomyBreast cancerMedicineSurgical marginPhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicineRadiologyDuctal carcinomaBreast imagingMalignancyCancerMammographyPathologyMastectomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High re-excision rates in breast-conserving surgery call for a new intraoperative approach to the lumpectomy margin evaluation problem. The unique intraoperative imaging system, presented here, demonstrated the capability of photoacoustic tomography (PAT) to deliver optical sensitivity and specificity, along with over 2-cm imaging depth, in a clinical setting. The system enabled the evaluation of tumor extent, shape, morphology, and position within lumpectomy specimens measuring up to 11 cm in diameter. The investigation included all major breast cancer-related lesions, such as invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), multifocal IDC, ductal carcinoma in situ and combinations of these variants. Coregistration with established ultrasound (US) technology, as well as comparison to specimen radiography, validated the performance of PAT, which appeared to facilitate better tumor visualization. Contrary to expected PA contrast mechanisms, PAT images of hemoglobin distribution correlated poorly with US-determined tumor location, while hypointense regions in lipid-weighted PAT images were in better agreement with US.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207