Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27106032›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2016

Rapid staining and imaging of subnuclear features to differentiate between malignant and benign breast tissues at a point-of-care setting.

Jenna L Mueller, Jennifer E Gallagher, Rhea Chitalia, Marlee Krieger, Alaattin Erkanli, Rebecca M Willett, Joseph Geradts, Nimmi Ramanujam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Mechanics and functional consequences of nuclear deformations.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Understanding the sources of errors inBiomedical optics express · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jenna L MuellerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, 136 Hudson Hall Box 90281, Durham, NC, 27708, USA. jenna.mueller@duke.edu.
Jennifer E GallagherDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 30 Medicine Drive White Zone, 3rd Floor, Suite 3570, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Rhea ChitaliaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, 136 Hudson Hall Box 90281, Durham, NC, 27708, USA.
Marlee KriegerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, 136 Hudson Hall Box 90281, Durham, NC, 27708, USA.
Alaattin ErkanliDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Brightleaf Square Suite 22B, 905 West Main Street, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Rebecca M WillettDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin - Madison, 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.
Joseph GeradtsDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Nimmi RamanujamDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, 136 Hudson Hall Box 90281, Durham, NC, 27708, USA.

Funding

A Novel Optical Spectral Imaging System for Rapid Imaging of Breast Tumor MarginsR01EB011574 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI RAMANUJAM, NIRMALA · 2011 to 2015
$4.9M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB011574
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHistopathology is the clinical standard for tissue diagnosis; however, it requires tissue processing, laboratory personnel and infrastructure, and a highly trained pathologist to diagnose the tissue. Optical microscopy can provide real-time diagnosis, which could be used to inform the management of breast cancer. The goal of this work is to obtain images of tissue morphology through fluorescence microscopy and vital fluorescent stains and to develop a strategy to segment and quantify breast tissue features in order to enable automated tissue diagnosis.

methodsWe combined acriflavine staining, fluorescence microscopy, and a technique called sparse component analysis to segment nuclei and nucleoli, which are collectively referred to as acriflavine positive features (APFs). A series of variables, which included the density, area fraction, diameter, and spacing of APFs, were quantified from images taken from clinical core needle breast biopsies and used to create a multivariate classification model. The model was developed using a training data set and validated using an independent testing data set.

resultsThe top performing classification model included the density and area fraction of smaller APFs (those less than 7 µm in diameter, which likely correspond to stained nucleoli).When applied to the independent testing set composed of 25 biopsy panels, the model achieved a sensitivity of 82 %, a specificity of 79 %, and an overall accuracy of 80 %.

conclusionsThese results indicate that our quantitative microscopy toolbox is a potentially viable approach for detecting the presence of malignancy in clinical core needle breast biopsies.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsBiopsyBreastBreast NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansStaining and LabelingBreast cancerImage analysisLogistic modelsOptical fluorescence imaging

Identifiers

PMID27106032
PMCPMC4900949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.