Cited by 45AI in cancer detectionCell Image Analysis TechniquesOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques

Prospects for Theranostics in Neurosurgical Imaging: Empowering Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy Diagnostics via Deep Learning

Open access
Izadyyazdanabadi, Mohammadhassan, Belykh, Evgenii, Mooney, Michael A., Eschbacher, Jennifer M., Nakaji, Peter, Yang, Yezhou, Preul, Mark C.·2018·Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract

Confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) is an advanced optical fluorescence imaging technology that has potential to increase intraoperative precision, extend resection, and tailor surgery for malignant invasive brain tumors because of its subcellular dimension resolution. Despite its promising diagnostic potential, interpreting the gray tone fluorescence images can be difficult for untrained users. CLE images can be distorted by motion artifacts, fluorescence signals out of detector dynamic range, or may be obscured by red blood cells, and thus interpreted as nondiagnostic (ND). However, just a single CLE image with a detectable pathognomonic histological tissue signature can suffice for intraoperative diagnosis. Dealing with the abundance of images from CLE is not unlike sifting through a myriad of genes, proteins, or other structural or metabolic markers to find something of commonality or uniqueness in cancer that might indicate a potential treatment scheme or target. In this review, we provide a detailed description of bioinformatical analysis methodology of CLE images that begins to assist the neurosurgeon and pathologist to rapidly connect on-the-fly intraoperative imaging, pathology, and surgical observation into a conclusionary system within the concept of theranostics. We present an overview and discuss deep learning models for automatic detection of the diagnostic CLE images and discuss various training regimes and ensemble modeling effect on power of deep learning predictive models. Two major approaches reviewed in this paper include the models that can automatically classify CLE images into diagnostic/ND, glioma/nonglioma, tumor/injury/normal categories, and models that can localize histological features on the CLE images using weakly supervised methods. We also briefly review advances in the deep learning approaches used for CLE image analysis in other organs. Significant advances in speed and precision of automated diagnostic frame selection would augment the diagnostic potential of CLE, improve operative workflow, and integration into brain tumor surgery. Such technology and bioinformatics analytics lend themselves to improved precision, personalization, and theranostics in brain tumor treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fonc.2018.00240

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Deep learning is applied for theranostics in neurosurgical imaging, combining confocal laser endomicroscopy with deep learning models for automatic detection of intraoperative CLE images on-the-fly.

    “and for theranostics in neurosurgical imaging, combining confocal laser endomicroscopy with deep learning models for automatic detection of intraoperative CLE images on-the-fly [95].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Izadyyazdanabadi, M., Belykh, E., Mooney, M. A., Eschbacher, J. M., Nakaji, P., Yang, Y., & Preul, M. C.
Affiliations
  • Barrow Neurological Institute (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
Corresponding author
Preul, Mark C.
Venue
Frontiers in Oncology
Published
2018-07-03
Volume
8
Pages
240-240
ISSN
2234-943X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2798728129
Cited by
45
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5
FWCI
0.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Barrow Neurological Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Cell Image Analysis Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Optical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Keywords
confocal laser endomicroscopy, theranostics, glioma, brain tumor surgery, intraoperative diagnosis, deep learning, image classification, weakly supervised localization, ensemble learning, motion artifacts, fluorescence imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review