ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
The Use of Optical Coherence Tomography for Gross Examination and Sampling of Fixed Breast Specimens: A Pilot Study.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Innovation to Application: Can Emerging Imaging Techniques Transform Breast Cancer Diagnosis?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Clinical evaluation of breast cancer tissue with optical coherence tomography: key findings from a large-scale study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Differentiating Primary and Recurrent Lesions in Patients with a History of Breast Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Galen medical journal · 2024Article
- Differentiation of histological calcification classifications in breast cancer using ultrashort echo time and chemical shift-encoded imaging MRI.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Compressed sensing of human breast optical coherence 3-D image volume data using predictive coding.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Thorough gross examination of breast cancer specimens is critical in order to sample relevant portions for subsequent microscopic examination. This task would benefit from an imaging tool which permits targeted and accurate block selection. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-destructive imaging technique that visualizes tissue architecture and has the potential to be an adjunct at the gross bench. Our objectives were: (1) to familiarize pathologists with the appearance of breast tissue entities on OCT; and (2) to evaluate the yield and quality of OCT images of unprocessed, formalin-fixed breast specimens for the purpose of learning and establishment of an OCT-histopathology library.
methodsFirstly, 175 samples from 40 formalin-fixed, unprocessed breast specimens with residual tissue after final diagnosis were imaged with OCT and then processed into histology slides. Histology findings were correlated with features on OCT.
resultsResidual malignancy was seen in 30% of tissue samples. Corresponding OCT images demonstrated that tumor can be differentiated from fibrous stroma, based on features such as irregular boundary, heterogeneous texture and reduced penetration depth. Ductal carcinoma in situ can be subtle, and it is made more recognizable by the presence of comedo necrosis and calcifications. OCT features of benign and malignant breast entities were compiled in a granular but user-friendly reference tool.
conclusionOCT images of fixed breast tissue were of sufficient quality to reproduce features of breast entities previously described in fresh tissue specimens. Our findings support the use of readily available unprocessed, fixed breast specimens for the establishment of an OCT-histopathology library.
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.