Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28352074›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Optimized Mass Spectrometry Analysis Workflow with Polarimetric Guidance for ex vivo and in situ Sampling of Biological Tissues.

Michael Woolman, Adam Gribble, Emma Bluemke, Jing Zou, Manuela Ventura, Nicholas Bernards, Megan Wu, Howard J Ginsberg, Sunit Das, Alex Vitkin and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Chemical science · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

11 authors.

Michael WoolmanTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada.
Adam GribbleDepartment of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, 101 College Street Suite 15-701, Toronto, ON, M5G 1L7, Canada.
Emma BluemkeTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada.
Jing ZouTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada.
Manuela VenturaTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada.
Nicholas BernardsTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada.
Megan WuPeter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, ON, M5G-0A4, Canada.
Howard J GinsbergTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada.
Sunit DasPeter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, ON, M5G-0A4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2146-4168
Alex VitkinPeter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, ON, M5G-0A4, Canada.
Arash Zarrine-AfsarTechna Institute for the Advancement of Technology for Health, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G-1P5, Canada. arash.zarrine.afsar@utoronto.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatially Targeted Mass Spectrometry (MS) analysis using survey scans with an imaging modality often requires consecutive tissue slices, because of the tissue damage during survey scan or due to incompatible sample preparation requirements between the survey modality and MS. We report two spatially targeted MS analysis workflows based on polarized light imaging guidance that use the same tissue sample for survey and targeted analysis. The first workflow is applicable for thin-slice analysis, and uses transmission-polarimetry-guided Desorption ElectroSpray Ionization Mass Spectrometry (DESI-MS), and confirmatory H&E histopathology analysis on the same slice; this is validated using quantitative digital pathology methods. The second workflow explores a polarimetry-guided MS platform for thick tissue assessment by developing reflection-mode polarimetric imaging coupled with a hand-held Picosecond InfraRed Laser (PIRL) MS ablation probe that requires minimal tissue removal to produce detectable signal. Tissue differentiation within 5-10 s of sampling with the hand-held probe is shown using multivariate statistical methods of the MS profiles. Both workflows were tasked with differentiating necrotic cancer sites from viable cancers using a breast tumour model, and their performance was evaluated. The use of the same tissue surface addresses mismatches in guidance due to intrinsic changes in tissue morphology over consecutive sections.

Indexed as

Mass SpectrometryAnimalsDiagnostic ImagingHistocytochemistryHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMiceSpectrometry, Mass, Electrospray IonizationWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID28352074
PMCPMC5428042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.