Performance metrics of an optical spectral imaging system for intra-operative assessment of breast tumor margins

As many as 20-70% of patients undergoing breast conserving surgery require repeat surgeries due to a close or positive surgical margin diagnosed post-operatively [1]. Currently there are no widely accepted tools for intra-operative margin assessment which is a significant unmet clinical need. Our group has developed a first-generation optical visible spectral imaging platform to image the molecular composition of breast tumor margins and has tested it clinically in 48 patients in a previously published study [2]. The goal of this paper is to report on the performance metrics of the system and compare it to clinical criteria for intra-operative tumor margin assessment. The system was found to have an average signal to noise ratio (SNR) >100 and <15% error in the extraction of optical properties indicating that there is sufficient SNR to leverage the differences in optical properties between negative and close/positive margins. The probe had a sensing depth of 0.5-2.2 mm over the wavelength range of 450-600 nm which is consistent with the pathologic criterion for clear margins of 0-2 mm. There was <1% cross-talk between adjacent channels of the multi-channel probe which shows that multiple sites can be measured simultaneously with negligible cross-talk between adjacent sites. Lastly, the system and measurement procedure were found to be reproducible when evaluated with repeated measures, with a low coefficient of variation (<0.11). The only aspect of the system not optimized for intra-operative use was the imaging time. The manuscript includes a discussion of how the speed of the system can be improved to work within the time constraints of an intra-operative setting.

[1]  L Wang,et al.  MCML--Monte Carlo modeling of light transport in multi-layered tissues. , 1995, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[2]  Zoya I. Volynskaya,et al.  Diagnosing breast cancer using Raman spectroscopy: prospective analysis. , 2009, Journal of biomedical optics.

[3]  Kent Griffith,et al.  Determinants of Breast Conservation Rates: Reasons for Mastectomy at a Comprehensive Cancer Center , 2009, The breast journal.

[4]  R. Simmons,et al.  Locally recurrent breast cancer after conservation therapy. , 2005, American journal of surgery.

[5]  K. Geisinger,et al.  Intraoperative evaluation of lumpectomy margins by imprint cytology with histologic correlation: a community hospital experience. , 2002, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[6]  I. Bleiweiss,et al.  Lumpectomy margins, reexcision, and local recurrence of breast cancer. , 2000, American journal of surgery.

[7]  Stephanie A. Kennedy,et al.  Rapid noninvasive optical imaging of tissue composition in breast tumor margins. , 2009, American journal of surgery.

[8]  S. Singletary Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. , 2002, American journal of surgery.

[9]  Nirmala Ramanujam,et al.  Monte Carlo-based inverse model for calculating tissue optical properties. Part II: Application to breast cancer diagnosis. , 2006, Applied optics.

[10]  Nirmala Ramanujam,et al.  Diagnosis of breast cancer using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy: Comparison of a Monte Carlo versus partial least squares analysis based feature extraction technique , 2006, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[11]  Quan Liu,et al.  Experimental validation of Monte Carlo modeling of fluorescence in tissues in the UV-visible spectrum. , 2003, Journal of biomedical optics.

[12]  Robert Shenk,et al.  Breast Conservation Surgery Achieving ≥ 2 mm Tumor‐Free Margins Results in Decreased Local‐Regional Recurrence Rates , 2006, The breast journal.

[13]  Kelly K. Hunt,et al.  Role for Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Patients Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery , 2007, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[14]  M. Osborne,et al.  The influence of additional surgical margins on the total specimen volume excised and the reoperative rate after breast-conserving surgery. , 2006, American journal of surgery.

[15]  W. Lamorte,et al.  Influence of breast cancer margin assessment method on the rates of positive margins and residual carcinoma. , 2006, American journal of surgery.

[16]  R. Dasari,et al.  Diagnosing breast cancer by using Raman spectroscopy. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Anita Mahadevan-Jansen,et al.  Autofluorescence and diffuse reflectance spectroscopy and spectral imaging for breast surgical margin analysis , 2010, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[18]  Zoya I. Volynskaya,et al.  Diagnosing breast cancer using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy and intrinsic fluorescence spectroscopy. , 2008, Journal of biomedical optics.

[19]  H. Kuerer If at First or Second You Don’t Succeed: Mastectomy? , 2005, Annals of surgical oncology.

[20]  L. Jacobs,et al.  Annals of Surgical Oncology 15(5):1271–1272 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-007-9766-0 Positive Margins: The Challenge Continues for Breast Surgeons , 2008 .

[21]  Freddy T. Nguyen,et al.  Intraoperative evaluation of breast tumor margins with optical coherence tomography. , 2009, Cancer research.

[22]  U. G. Dailey Cancer,Facts and Figures about. , 2022, Journal of the National Medical Association.

[23]  D. Mahvi,et al.  Frozen Section Analysis for Intraoperative Margin Assessment During Breast-Conserving Surgery Results in Low Rates of Re-excision and Local Recurrence , 2007, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[24]  S. Lakhani,et al.  Diagnosis of breast cancer using elastic-scattering spectroscopy: preliminary clinical results. , 2000, Journal of biomedical optics.

[25]  Emil D. Kurniawan BMedSc,et al.  Predictors of Surgical Margin Status in Breast-Conserving Surgery Within a Breast Screening Program , 2008, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[26]  J. Cendan,et al.  Accuracy of intraoperative frozen-section analysis of breast cancer lumpectomy-bed margins. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[27]  Karthik Vishwanath,et al.  A Robust Monte Carlo Model for the Extraction of Biological Absorption and Scattering In Vivo , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[28]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  Local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy for invasive breast cancer: high incidence in young patients and association with poor survival. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[29]  R. Collins,et al.  Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials , 2005, The Lancet.

[30]  Mrcsi Mary F. Dillon MB,et al.  Factors Affecting Successful Breast Conservation for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ , 2006, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[31]  S. Nicosia,et al.  Touch preparation cytology of breast lumpectomy margins with histologic correlation. , 1991, Archives of surgery.

[32]  S. Singletary,et al.  Intraoperative margin assessment reduces reexcision rates in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery. , 2003, American journal of surgery.

[33]  A. Saarela,et al.  Determinants of positive histologic margins and residual tumor after lumpectomy for early breast cancer: A prospective study with special reference to touch preparation cytology , 1997, Journal of surgical oncology.

[34]  N. Ramanujam,et al.  Monte Carlo-based inverse model for calculating tissue optical properties. Part I: Theory and validation on synthetic phantoms. , 2006, Applied optics.