ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2024
Raman fiber-optic probe for rapid diagnosis of gastric and esophageal tumors with machine learning analysis or similarity assessments: a comparative study.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of AI-based raman spectroscopy in the diagnosis of gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Lasers in medical science · 2026Pooled it
- Label-free molecular profiling of cancer using Raman spectroscopy: from fundamentals to clinical applications.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Upper Gastrointestinal Diagnosis.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- Application of deep learning models in the pathological classification and staging of esophageal cancer: A focus on Wave-Vision Transformer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Gastric and esophageal cancers, the predominant forms of upper gastrointestinal malignancies, contribute significantly to global cancer mortality. Routine detection methods, including medical imaging, endoscopic examination, and pathological biopsy, often suffer from drawbacks such as low sensitivity and laborious and complex procedures. Raman spectroscopy is a non-invasive and label-free optical technique that provides highly sensitive biomolecular information to facilitate effective tumor identification. In this work, we report the use of fiber-optic Raman spectroscopy for the accurate and rapid diagnosis of gastric and esophageal cancers. Using a database of 14,000 spectra from 140 ex vivo tissue pieces of both tumor and normal tissue samples, we compare the random forest (RF) and our established Euclidean distance Raman spectroscopy (EDRS) model. The RF analysis achieves a sensitivity of 85.23% and an accuracy of 83.05% in diagnosing gastric tumors. The EDRS algorithm with improved diagnostic transparency further increases the sensitivity to 92.86% and accuracy to 89.29%. When these diagnostic protocols are extended to esophageal tumors, the RF and EDRS models achieve accuracies of 71.27% and 93.18%, respectively. Finally, we demonstrate that fewer than 20 spectra are sufficient to achieve good Raman diagnostic accuracy for both tumor tissues. This optimizes the balance between acquisition time and diagnostic performance. Our work, although conducted on ex vivo tissue models, offers valuable insights for in vivo in situ endoscopic Raman diagnosis of gastric and esophageal cancer lesions in the future. Our study provides a robust, rapid, and convenient method as a new paradigm in in vivo endoscopic medical diagnostics that integrates spectroscopic techniques and a Raman probe for detecting upper gastrointestinal malignancies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39322799What 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.