MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294128124 · doi:10.1117/1.jbo.27.9.095003

Image-guided Raman spectroscopy navigation system to improve transperineal prostate cancer detection. Part 1: Raman spectroscopy fiber-optics system and in situ tissue characterization

2022· article· en· W4294128124 on OpenAlexafffund
Fabien Picot, Roozbeh Shams, F. Dallaire, Guillaume Sheehy, Trang Tran, David Grajales, Mirela Birlea, Dominique Trudel, Cynthia Ménard, Samuel Kadoury, Frédéric Leblond

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEx vivoProstate cancerProstateProstatectomyBiomedical engineeringIn situBiopsyIn vivoMedicineProstate biopsyPathologyMedical physicsMaterials scienceCancerChemistryInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SIGNIFICANCE: The diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) and focal treatment by brachytherapy are limited by the lack of precise intraoperative information to target tumors during biopsy collection and radiation seed placement. Image-guidance techniques could improve the safety and diagnostic yield of biopsy collection as well as increase the efficacy of radiotherapy. AIM: To estimate the accuracy of PCa detection using in situ Raman spectroscopy (RS) in a pilot in-human clinical study and assess biochemical differences between in vivo and ex vivo measurements. APPROACH: A new miniature RS fiber-optics system equipped with an electromagnetic (EM) tracker was guided by trans-rectal ultrasound-guided imaging, fused with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging to acquire 49 spectra in situ (in vivo) from 18 PCa patients. In addition, 179 spectra were acquired ex vivo in fresh prostate samples from 14 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Two machine-learning models were trained to discriminate cancer from normal prostate tissue from both in situ and ex vivo datasets. RESULTS: A support vector machine (SVM) model was trained on the in situ dataset and its performance was evaluated using leave-one-patient-out cross validation from 28 normal prostate measurements and 21 in-tumor measurements. The model performed at 86% sensitivity and 72% specificity. Similarly, an SVM model was trained with the ex vivo dataset from 152 normal prostate measurements and 27 tumor measurements showing reduced cancer detection performance mostly attributable to spatial registration inaccuracies between probe measurements and histology assessment. A qualitative comparison between in situ and ex vivo measurements demonstrated a one-to-one correspondence and similar ratios between the main Raman bands (e.g., amide I-II bands, phenylalanine). CONCLUSIONS: PCa detection can be achieved using RS and machine learning models for image-guidance applications using in situ measurements during prostate biopsy procedures.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207