ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2025
Diffuse reflectance and fluorescence spectroscopy for breast conserving surgery.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Detection of margin positivity in breast cancer using fluorescence and diffuse reflectance imaging.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Time-Resolved Fluorescence and Diffuse Reflectance (TRF-DR) Spectroscopy for Heterogeneous Breast Tissue Classification and Tumor Margin Assessment.Journal of biophotonics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe major challenge in breast conserving surgery is the high rates of re-excision due to positive resection margins. This study evaluates whether a combined diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) and laser induced intrinsic fluorescence spectroscopy (IFS) technique can differentiate breast tissue sample types, towards the development of an intraoperative margin assessment tool.
methodsBreast tissue samples were collected from patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. A handheld DRS-IFS probe was used on the frozen thawed ex-vivo breast samples to acquire spectral data. Machine learning classifiers were used to determine sensitivity, specificity, overall diagnostic accuracy, and the area under the curve (AUC) against "gold-standard" histopathology ground truth.
results181 breast tissue samples from 138 patients were interrogated using DRS-IFS. All patients were female, with median age (range) of 56.8 (20-94) years The total number of spectra acquired was 18,349. Following five-fold cross validation for normal versus cancer tissue, extreme gradient boost classifier achieved a sensitivity of 84% (SD ± 13), specificity of 61% (SD ± 16), overall diagnostic accuracy of 75% (SD ± 3), and AUC of 84%.
conclusionThe results suggests that DRS-IFS can distinguish normal breast tissue from breast cancer with high diagnostic accuracy. For DRS-IFS to be translated into the operating theatre to aid a surgeon's real-time visualisation for oncologic margin control assessment of intraoperative, the in vivo diagnostic accuracy needs to be determined.
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.