MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414168442 · doi:10.1117/1.jbo.30.s3.s34109

Deep learning-enabled fluorescence imaging for oral cancer margin classification in preclinical models

2025· article· en· W4414168442 on OpenAlexafffund
Natalie Won, Jay S. Wunder, Mandolin Bartling, Esmat Najjar, Sharon Tzelnick, Brian C. Wilson, Jonathan C. Irish, Michael J. Daly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersPrincess Margaret Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMargin (machine learning)CancerMedical imagingOptical imagingCancer detectionFluorescence-lifetime imaging microscopyCancer imagingPreclinical imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SignificanceOral cancer surgery demands precise margin delineation to ensure complete tumor resection (healthy tissue margin >5 mm) while preserving postoperative functionality. Inadequate margins most frequently occur at the deep surgical margins, where tumors are located beneath the tissue surface; however, current fluorescent optical imaging systems are limited by their inability to quantify subsurface structures. Combining structured light techniques with deep learning may enable intraoperative margin assessment of 3D surgical specimens.AimA deep learning (DL)-enabled spatial frequency domain imaging (SFDI) system is investigated to provide subsurface depth quantification of fluorescent inclusions.ApproachA diffusion theory-based numerical simulation of SFDI was used to generate synthetic images for DL training. ResNet and U-Net convolutional neural networks were developed to predict margin distance (subsurface depth) and fluorophore concentration from fluorescence images and optical property maps. Validation was conducted using in silico SFDI images of composite spherical harmonics, as well as simulated and phantom datasets of patient-derived tongue tumor shapes. Further testing was done in ex vivo animal tissue with fluorescent inclusions.ResultsFor oral cancer optical properties, the U-Net DL model predicted the overall depth, concentration, and closest depth with errors of 1.43±1.84 mm, 2.26±1.63 μg/ml, and 0.33±0.31 mm, respectively, using in silico patient-derived tongue shapes with closest depths below 10 mm. In PpIX fluorescent phantoms of inclusion depths up to 8 mm, the closest subsurface depth was predicted with an error of 0.57±0.38 mm. For ex vivo tissue, the closest distance to the fluorescent inclusions with depths up to 6 mm was predicted with an error of 0.59±0.53 mm.ConclusionsA DL-enabled SFDI system trained with in silico images demonstrates promise in providing margin assessment of oral cancer tumors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207