9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Validation of full-field optical coherence tomography in distinguishing malignant and benign tissue in resected pancreatic cancer specimens

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. The minority of patients can undergo curative-intended surgical therapy due to progressive disease stage at time of diagnosis. Nonetheless, tumor involvement of surgical margins is seen in up to 70% of resections, being a strong negative prognostic factor. Real-time intraoperative imaging modalities may aid surgeons to obtain tumor-free resection margins. Full-field optical coherence tomography (FF-OCT) is a promising diagnostic tool using high-resolution white-light interference microscopy without tissue processing. Therefore, we composed an atlas of FF-OCT images of malignant and benign pancreatic tissue, and investigated the accuracy with which the pathologists could distinguish these.

          Materials and methods

          One hundred FF-OCT images were collected from specimens of 29 patients who underwent pancreatic resection for various indications between 2014 and 2016. One experienced gastrointestinal pathologist and one pathologist in training scored independently the FF-OCT images as malignant or benign blinded to the final pathology conclusion. Results were compared to those obtained with standard hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) slides.

          Results

          Overall, combined test characteristics of both pathologists showed a sensitivity of 72%, specificity of 74%, positive predictive value of 69%, negative predictive value of 79% and an overall accuracy of 73%. In the subset of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients, 97% of the FF-OCT images (n = 35) were interpreted as tumor by at least one pathologist. Moreover, normal pancreatic tissue was recognised in all cases by at least one pathologist. However, atrophy and fibrosis, serous cystadenoma and neuroendocrine tumors were more often wrongly scored, in 63%, 100% and 25% respectively.

          Conclusion

          FF-OCT could distinguish normal pancreatic tissue from pathologic pancreatic tissue in both processed as non-processed specimens using architectural features. The accuracy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is promising and warrants further evaluation using improved assessment criteria.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

          The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid vs gemcitabine following pancreatic cancer resection: a randomized controlled trial.

            Adjuvant fluorouracil has been shown to be of benefit for patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine is known to be the most effective agent in advanced disease as well as an effective agent in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. To determine whether fluorouracil or gemcitabine is superior in terms of overall survival as adjuvant treatment following resection of pancreatic cancer. The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 trial, an open-label, phase 3, randomized controlled trial conducted in 159 pancreatic cancer centers in Europe, Australasia, Japan, and Canada. Included in ESPAC-3 version 2 were 1088 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had undergone cancer resection; patients were randomized between July 2000 and January 2007 and underwent at least 2 years of follow-up. Patients received either fluorouracil plus folinic acid (folinic acid, 20 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus injection, followed by fluorouracil, 425 mg/m(2) intravenous bolus injection given 1-5 days every 28 days) (n = 551) or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion once a week for 3 of every 4 weeks) (n = 537) for 6 months. Primary outcome measure was overall survival; secondary measures were toxicity, progression-free survival, and quality of life. Final analysis was carried out on an intention-to-treat basis after a median of 34.2 (interquartile range, 27.1-43.4) months' follow-up after 753 deaths (69%). Median survival was 23.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.1-25.0) months for patients treated with fluorouracil plus folinic acid and 23.6 (95% CI, 21.4-26.4) months for those treated with gemcitabine (chi(1)(2) = 0.7; P = .39; hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.81-1.08]). Seventy-seven patients (14%) receiving fluorouracil plus folinic acid had 97 treatment-related serious adverse events, compared with 40 patients (7.5%) receiving gemcitabine, who had 52 events (P < .001). There were no significant differences in either progression-free survival or global quality-of-life scores between the treatment groups. Compared with the use of fluorouracil plus folinic acid, gemcitabine did not result in improved overall survival in patients with completely resected pancreatic cancer. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00058201.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

              Mortality rates associated with pancreatic resection for cancer have steadily decreased with time, but improvements in long-term survival are less clear. This prospective study evaluated risk factors for survival after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Data from 366 consecutive patients recorded prospectively between November 1993 and September 2001 were analysed using univariate and multivariate models. Fifty-eight patients (15.8 per cent) underwent surgical exploration only, 97 patients (26.5 per cent) underwent palliative bypass surgery and 211 patients (57.7 per cent) resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Stage I disease was present in 9.0 per cent, stage II in 18.0 per cent, stage III in 68.7 per cent and stage IV in 4.3 per cent of patients who underwent resection. Resection was curative (R0) in 75.8 per cent of patients. Procedures included pylorus-preserving Whipple resection (41.2 per cent), classical Whipple resection (37.0 per cent), left pancreatic resection (13.7 per cent) and total pancreatectomy (8.1 per cent). The in-hospital mortality and cumulative morbidity rates were 2.8 and 44.1 per cent respectively. The overall actuarial 5-year survival rate was 19.8 per cent after resection. Survival was better after curative resection (R0) (24.2 per cent) and in lymph-node negative patients (31.6 per cent). A Cox proportional hazards survival analysis indicated that curative resection was the most powerful independent predictor of long-term survival. Resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma can be performed safely. The overall survival rate is determined by the radicality of resection. Patients deemed fit for surgery who have no radiological signs of distant metastasis should undergo surgical exploration. Resection should follow if there is a reasonable likelihood that an R0 resection can be obtained. Copyright 2004 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                17 April 2017
                2017
                : 12
                : 4
                : e0175862
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Division of Image Processing, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
                Tufts University, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                • Conceptualization: JM AV JD CV.

                • Data curation: LM PS.

                • Formal analysis: LM.

                • Funding acquisition: JM AV BL JD.

                • Investigation: LM PS AF LH.

                • Methodology: JM LM PS AF.

                • Resources: JM BB HM AV JD BL.

                • Software: JE.

                • Supervision: HM BL CV AV JD JM.

                • Validation: LM PS JM.

                • Visualization: LM PS.

                • Writing – original draft: LM PS JM AF JD.

                • Writing – review & editing: LM PS JM.

                ‡ These authors are shared first authors on this work.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3649-8504
                Article
                PONE-D-16-42015
                10.1371/journal.pone.0175862
                5393621
                28414765
                e4700995-3b87-4f0f-b00a-bb7355b650cb
                © 2017 van Manen et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 3 November 2016
                : 31 March 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 4, Pages: 15
                Funding
                This work was funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program FP7-ICT- 2011-8 under grant agreement number 318729 (CAReIOCA project) and by the Bas Mulder Award (grant UL2015-7665) from the Alpe d'HuZes foundation/Dutch Cancer Society.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Health Care Providers
                Medical Doctors
                Pathologists
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Professions
                Medical Doctors
                Pathologists
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Cancer Treatment
                Surgical Oncology
                Tumor Resection
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Clinical Medicine
                Clinical Oncology
                Surgical Oncology
                Tumor Resection
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Clinical Oncology
                Surgical Oncology
                Tumor Resection
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Surgical and Invasive Medical Procedures
                Surgical Resection
                Tumor Resection
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Cancer Treatment
                Surgical Oncology
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Clinical Medicine
                Clinical Oncology
                Surgical Oncology
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Clinical Oncology
                Surgical Oncology
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Cancer Detection and Diagnosis
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Cancer Detection and Diagnosis
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Surgical and Invasive Medical Procedures
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Surgical and Invasive Medical Procedures
                Surgical Resection
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Cancers and Neoplasms
                Carcinomas
                Adenocarcinomas
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Gastroenterology and Hepatology
                Pancreatitis
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and added in the supporting data files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article