Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35478042›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2022

In vivo microscopy as an adjunctive tool to guide detection, diagnosis, and treatment.

Kevin W Bishop, Kristen C Maitland, Milind Rajadhyaksha, Jonathan T C Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Scattering-Based Light-Sheet Microscopy Imaging of Human Papillomavirus-Associated Squamous Lesions of the Anal Canal: A Proof-of-Principle Study.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Engineering the future of 3D pathology.The journal of pathology. Clinical research · 2024
    Article
  7. Optical imaging technologies forCurrent opinion in biomedical engineering · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kevin W BishopUniversity of Washington, Department of Bioengineering, Seattle, Washington, United States.
Kristen C MaitlandTexas A&M University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, College Station, Texas, United States.
Milind RajadhyakshaMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Dermatology Service, New York, New York, United States.
Jonathan T C LiuUniversity of Washington, Department of Bioengineering, Seattle, Washington, United States.
University of Washington · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USTexas A&M University · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
In vivo dual-axis confocal microscopy of 5-ALA-induced PpIX to guide low-grade glioma resectionsR01CA244170 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LIU, JONATHAN T.C., SANAI, NADER · 2020 to 2024
$2.8M
Instrumentation platform for 3D pathology with open-top light-sheet microscopyR01EB031002 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LIU, JONATHAN T.C. · 2021 to 2024
$1.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R01 CA244170NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB031002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceThere have been numerous academic and commercial efforts to develop high-resolution in vivo microscopes for a variety of clinical use cases, including early disease detection and surgical guidance. While many high-profile studies, commercialized products, and publications have resulted from these efforts, mainstream clinical adoption has been relatively slow other than for a few clinical applications (e.g., dermatology).

aimHere, our goals are threefold: (1) to introduce and motivate the need for in vivo microscopy (IVM) as an adjunctive tool for clinical detection, diagnosis, and treatment, (2) to discuss the key translational challenges facing the field, and (3) to propose best practices and recommendations to facilitate clinical adoption. APPROACH: We will provide concrete examples from various clinical domains, such as dermatology, oral/gastrointestinal oncology, and neurosurgery, to reinforce our observations and recommendations.

resultsWhile the incremental improvement and optimization of IVM technologies should and will continue to occur, future translational efforts would benefit from the following: (1) integrating clinical and industry partners upfront to define and maintain a compelling value proposition, (2) identifying multimodal/multiscale imaging workflows, which are necessary for success in most clinical scenarios, and (3) developing effective artificial intelligence tools for clinical decision support, tempered by a realization that complete adoption of such tools will be slow.

conclusionsThe convergence of imaging modalities, academic-industry-clinician partnerships, and new computational capabilities has the potential to catalyze rapid progress and adoption of IVM in the next few decades.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceIntravital MicroscopyForecastingMicroscopyartificial intelligenceclinical translationcommercializationin vivo microscopymultimodal imaging

Identifiers

PMID35478042
PMCPMC9043840
OpenAlexW4225089679

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.