Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34427379›Full record

ArticleVeterinary and comparative oncology2021

Diagnostic accuracy of optical coherence tomography for surgical margin assessment of feline injection-site sarcoma.

Mary J Coleman, Laura E Selmic, Jonathan P Samuelson, Ryan Jennings, Pin-Chieh Huang, Eric M McLaughlin, Vincent A Wavreille, Josephine A Dornbusch, Janis Lapsley, James Howard and 10 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary and comparative oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 61% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

20 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Mary J ColemanDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Laura E SelmicDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6695-6273
Jonathan P SamuelsonDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3593-7202
Ryan JenningsDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Pin-Chieh HuangBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.
Eric M McLaughlinCenter for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Vincent A WavreilleDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Josephine A DornbuschDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Janis LapsleyDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
James HowardDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Edward ChengDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Alex KalamarasDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Kendra HearonDepartment of Surgery, Metropolitan Veterinary Specialists, Philadelphia, Pennsylvannia, USA.
Megan CrayDepartment of Surgery, Angell Animal Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Janet GrimesDepartment of Small Animal Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4554-8013
Brandan Wustefeld-JanssensDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8458-1735
Katie KennedyDepartment of Surgery, Animal Medical Center, New York City, New York, USA.
Owen SkinnerDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3765-429X
Pierre AmsellemDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA.
Stephen A BoppartBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.
The Ohio State University · USUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · USDermatology Specialists · USMissouri College · USMSPCA-Angell · USTexas College · USThe Schwarzman Animal Medical Center · USUniversity of Georgia · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

Intraoperative Polarization-Sensitive OCT for Assessing Breast Tumor MarginsR01CA213149 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN · PI BOPPART, STEPHEN A · 2017 to 2021
$2.4M
Morris Animal Foundation D16FE-034NCI NIH HHS R01 CA213149NIH HHS R01CA213149
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The invasive, locally aggressive nature of feline injection-site sarcomas (FISSs) poses a unique challenge for surgeons to obtain complete margins with surgical excision. Optical coherence tomography (OCT), an imaging technology that uses light waves to generate real-time views of tissue architecture, provides an emerging solution to this dilemma by allowing fast, high-resolution scanning of surgical margins. The purpose of this study was to use OCT to assess surgical margins of FISS and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of OCT for detecting residual cancer using six evaluators of varying experience. Five FISSs were imaged with OCT to create a training set of OCT images that were compared with histopathology. Next, 25 FISSs were imaged with OCT prior to histopathology. Six evaluators of varying experience participated in a training session on OCT imaging after which each of the evaluators was given a dataset that included OCT images and videos to score on a scale from cancerous to non-cancerous. Diagnostic accuracy statistics were calculated. The overall sensitivity and specificity for classification of OCT images by evaluators were 78.9% and 77.6%, respectively. Correct classification rate of OCT images was associated with experience, while individual sensitivities and specificities had more variation between experience groups. This study demonstrates the ability of evaluators to correctly classify OCT images with overall low levels of experience and training and also illustrates areas where increased training can improve accuracy of evaluators in interpretation of OCT surgical margin images.

Indexed as

Cat DiseasesMargins of ExcisionSarcomaSoft Tissue NeoplasmsAnimalsCatsInjectionsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Optical Coherencecatsmargins of excisionoptical coherencesarcomassoft-tissue neoplasmstomography

Identifiers

PMID34427379
PMCPMC8612953
OpenAlexW3195491268

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.