Automated algorithm for breast tissue differentiation in optical coherence tomography.

Physical Sciences, Inc., 20 New England Business Center, Andover, Massachusetts 01810, USA.
Journal of Biomedical Optics (Impact Factor: 2.75). 01/2009; 14(3):034040. DOI: 10.1117/1.3156821
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT An automated algorithm for differentiating breast tissue types based on optical coherence tomography (OCT) data is presented. Eight parameters are derived from the OCT reflectivity profiles and their means and covariance matrices are calculated for each tissue type from a training set (48 samples) selected based on histological examination. A quadratic discrimination score is then used to assess the samples from a validation set. The algorithm results for a set of 89 breast tissue samples were correlated with the histological findings, yielding specificity and sensitivity of 0.88. If further perfected to work in real time and yield even higher sensitivity and specificity, this algorithm would be a valuable tool for biopsy guidance and could significantly increase procedure reliability by reducing both the number of nondiagnostic aspirates and the number of false negatives.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We report a study on the use of polarization sensitive optical coherence tomography (PSOCT) for discriminating malignant (invasive ductal carcinoma), benign (fibroadenoma) and normal (adipocytes) breast tissue sites. The results show that while conventional OCT, that utilizes only the intensity of light back-scattered from tissue microstructures, is able to discriminate breast tissues as normal (adipocytes) and abnormal (malignant and benign) tissues, PS-OCT helps in discriminating between malignant and benign tissue sites also. The estimated values of birefringence obtained from the PSOCT imaging show that benign breast tissue samples have significantly higher birefringence as compared to the malignant tissue samples.
    Laser Physics 01/2011; 21(12):2143-2148. · 2.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The goal of this research was to develop and preliminarily test a novel technology and instrumentation that could help to significantly increase the diagnostic yield of current colon cancer screening procedures. This technology is based on a combined fluorescence-optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, and topical delivery of a cancer-targeting agent. Gold colloid-adsorbed poly(ε-caprolactone) microparticles were labeled with a near-infrared dye, and functionalized with argentine-glycine-aspartic acid (RGD peptide) to effectively target cancer tissue, and enhance fluorescence-imaging contrast. The RGD peptide recognizes the α(v)β(3)-integrin receptor, which is overexpressed by epithelial cancer cells. OCT was used under fluorescence guidance to visualize tissue morphology and, thus, to serve as a confirmatory tool for cancer presence. A preliminary testing of this technology on human colon cancer cell lines, a mouse model of colon cancer, as well as human colon tissue specimens, was performed. Strong binding of microparticles to cancer cells and no binding to cells that do not significantly express integrins, such as mouse fibroblasts, was observed. Preferential binding to cancer tissue was also observed. Strong fluorescence signals were obtained from cancer tissue, owing to the efficient binding of the contrast agent. OCT imaging was capable of revealing clear differences between normal and cancer tissue. A dual-modality imaging approach combined with topical delivery of a cancer-targeting contrast agent has been preliminarily tested for colon cancer diagnosis. Preferential binding of the contrast agent to cancer tissue allowed the cancer-suspicious locations to be highlighted and, thus, guided OCT imaging to visualize tissue morphology and determine tissue type. If successful, this multimodal approach might help to increase the sensitivity and the specificity of current colon cancer-screening procedures in the future.
    Nanomedicine 11/2010; 5(9):1467-79. · 5.26 Impact Factor
  • Journal of Innovative Optical Health Sciences 01/2011; 4(1):59-66. · 0.63 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jul 10, 2014