A handheld device for intra-cavity and ex vivo fluorescence imaging of breast conserving surgery margins with 5-aminolevulinic acid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Visualization of cancer during breast conserving surgery (BCS) remains challenging; the BCS reoperation rate is reported to be 20-70% of patients. An urgent clinical need exists for real-time intraoperative visualization of breast carcinomas during BCS. We previously demonstrated the ability of a prototype imaging device to identify breast carcinoma in excised surgical specimens following 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) administration. However, this prototype device was not designed to image the surgical cavity for remaining carcinoma after the excised lumpectomy specimen is removed. A new handheld fluorescence (FL) imaging prototype device, designed to image both excised specimens and within the surgical cavity, was assessed in a clinical trial to evaluate its clinical utility for first-in-human, real-time intraoperative imaging during index BCS. Results The imaging device combines consumer-grade imaging sensory technology with miniature light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and multiband optical filtering to capture high-resolution white light (WL) and FL digital images and videos. The technology allows for visualization of protoporphyrin IX (PpIX), which fluoresces red when excited by violet-blue light. To date, $$n = 17$$ n = 17 patients have received $$20\frac{\text {mg}}{\textrm{kg}}$$ 20 mg kg bodyweight (BW) 5-ALA orally 2-4 h before imaging to facilitate the accumulation of PpIX within tumour cells. Tissue types were identified based on their colour appearance. Breast tumours in sectioned lumpectomies appeared red, which contrasted against the green connective tissues and orange-brown adipose tissues. In addition, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) that was missed during intraoperative standard of care was identified at the surgical margin at <1 mm depth. In addition, artifacts due to the surgical drape, illumination, and blood within the surgical cavity were discovered. Conclusions This study has demonstrated the detection of a grossly occult positive margin intraoperatively. Artifacts from imaging within the surgical cavity have been identified, and potential mitigations have been proposed. Trial Registration Identifier: (Trial start date is September 2010. It was registered to ClinicalTrials.gov retrospectively on April 23, 2013, then later updated on April 9, 2020, to reflect the introduction of the new imaging device.)
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".