The Use of Optical Coherence Tomography for Gross Examination and Sampling of Fixed Breast Specimens: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thorough gross examination of breast cancer specimens is critical in order to sample relevant portions for subsequent microscopic examination. This task would benefit from an imaging tool which permits targeted and accurate block selection. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-destructive imaging technique that visualizes tissue architecture and has the potential to be an adjunct at the gross bench. Our objectives were: (1) to familiarize pathologists with the appearance of breast tissue entities on OCT; and (2) to evaluate the yield and quality of OCT images of unprocessed, formalin-fixed breast specimens for the purpose of learning and establishment of an OCT-histopathology library. METHODS: Firstly, 175 samples from 40 formalin-fixed, unprocessed breast specimens with residual tissue after final diagnosis were imaged with OCT and then processed into histology slides. Histology findings were correlated with features on OCT. RESULTS: Residual malignancy was seen in 30% of tissue samples. Corresponding OCT images demonstrated that tumor can be differentiated from fibrous stroma, based on features such as irregular boundary, heterogeneous texture and reduced penetration depth. Ductal carcinoma in situ can be subtle, and it is made more recognizable by the presence of comedo necrosis and calcifications. OCT features of benign and malignant breast entities were compiled in a granular but user-friendly reference tool. CONCLUSION: OCT images of fixed breast tissue were of sufficient quality to reproduce features of breast entities previously described in fresh tissue specimens. Our findings support the use of readily available unprocessed, fixed breast specimens for the establishment of an OCT-histopathology library.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".