ArticlePloS one2014
Buccal spectral markers for lung cancer risk stratification.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Probing Field Cancerization in the Gastrointestinal Tract Using a Hybrid Raman and Partial Wave Spectroscopy Microscope.Analytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Hybrid Raman and Partial Wave Spectroscopy Microscope for the Characterization of Molecular and Structural Alterations in Tissue.Journal of biophotonics · 2024Article
- Convolutional neural network-based regression analysis to predict subnuclear chromatin organization from two-dimensional optical scattering signals.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Early detection of lung cancer using artificial intelligence-enhanced optical nanosensing of chromatin alterations in field carcinogenesis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Towards the Optical Detection of Field Cancerization in the Buccal Mucosa of Patients with Lung Cancer.Translational oncology · 2019Article
- Detection of Malignancy in Ocular Surface Lesions by Inverse Spectroscopic Optical Coherence Tomography and Two-Photon Autofluorescence.Translational vision science & technology · 2019Article
- Optical pre-screening for laryngeal cancer using reflectance spectroscopy of the buccal mucosa.Biomedical optics express · 2018Article
- Fully automated fiber-based optical spectroscopy system for use in a clinical setting.Journal of biomedical optics · 2018Article
- Optical detection of field cancerization in the buccal mucosa of patients with esophageal cancer.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Article
- Microscope objective based 4Biomedical optics express · 2017Article
- Enhanced Survival with Implantable Scaffolds That Capture Metastatic Breast Cancer Cells In Vivo.Cancer research · 2016Article
- Fractal Characterization of Chromatin Decompaction in Live Cells.Biophysical journal · 2015Article
- Rectal Optical Markers for In Vivo Risk Stratification of Premalignant Colorectal Lesions.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2015Article
- Subdiffusion reflectance spectroscopy to measure tissue ultrastructure and microvasculature: model and inverse algorithm.Journal of biomedical optics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths in the US with >150,000 deaths per year. In order to more effectively reduce lung cancer mortality, more sophisticated screening paradigms are needed. Previously, our group demonstrated the use of low-coherence enhanced backscattering (LEBS) spectroscopy to detect and quantify the micro/nano-architectural correlates of colorectal and pancreatic field carcinogenesis. In the lung, the buccal (cheek) mucosa has been suggested as an excellent surrogate site in the "field of injury". We, therefore, wanted to assess whether LEBS could similarly sense the presence of lung. To this end, we applied a fiber-optic LEBS probe to a dataset of 27 smokers without diagnosed lung cancer (controls) and 46 with lung cancer (cases), which was divided into a training and a blinded validation set (32 and 41 subjects, respectively). LEBS readings of the buccal mucosa were taken from the oral cavity applying gentle contact. The diagnostic LEBS marker was notably altered in patients harboring lung cancer compared to smoking controls. The prediction rule developed on training set data provided excellent diagnostics with 94% sensitivity, 80% specificity, and 95% accuracy. Applying the same threshold to the blinded validation set yielded 79% sensitivity and 83% specificity. These results were not confounded by patient demographics or impacted by cancer type or location. Moreover, the prediction rule was robust across all stages of cancer including stage I. We envision the use of LEBS as the first part of a two-step paradigm shift in lung cancer screening in which patients with high LEBS risk markers are funnelled into more invasive screening for confirmation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.