| Literature DB >> 32555698 |
Andrew Newton1, Jarrod Predina1, Michael Mison2, Jeffrey Runge2, Charles Bradley3, Darko Stefanovski4, Sunil Singhal1, David Holt2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Current methods of intraoperative margin assessment in breast conserving surgery are impractical, unreliable, or time consuming. We hypothesized that intraoperative near-infrared (NIR) imaging with an FDA-approved NIR optical contrast agent could identify canine mammary tumors, a spontaneous large animal model of human breast cancer, during surgery.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32555698 PMCID: PMC7299356 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234791
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of study subjects.
| Case | Age | Breed | Weight (kg) | Intact | Mammary Glands Involved | Malignant Tumors: Number, Size (cm) | Benign Tumors: Number, Size (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Mixed | 4.2 | Yes | L4, R4, R5 | 0: n/a | 3: 0.5–2 | |
| 9 | Golden Retriever | 30.0 | Yes | L2 | 0: n/a | 1: 2 | |
| 10 | Mixed | 17.3 | Yes | L5 | 1: 2 | 0: n/a | |
| L5, R5 | 2: 3,4 | 0: n/a | |||||
| 7 | German Shepherd | 35.0 | No | R2, R3, R4, R5, L3 | 1: 5 | 4: 0.2–4 | |
| Unknown | Mixed | 3.5 | No | R2, R3, R4, R5 | 1: 1 | 3: 0.2–2 | |
| 7 | Chihuahua | 4.6 | Yes | R4, L4 | 0: n/a | 2: 2,2 | |
| 11 | Chihuahua | 2.1 | No | L4, L5 | 0: n/a | 2,:0.5, 1 | |
| 14 | Lhasa Apso | 10.8 | No | L3, L4, L5 | 2: 5, 5 | 1: 0.5 | |
| 9 | Cocker Spaniel | 8.5 | No | R4 | 1: 2 | 0: n/a | |
| 13 | Chihuahua | 2.6 | Yes | R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, L2, L3, L4, L5 | 6: 1–2 | 3: 0.5, 0.5,0.5 | |
| 14 | Border Collie | 18.0 | Yes | R5 | 1: 3 | 0: n/a | |
| 9 | Bulldog | 25.0 | No | L3 | 1: 3 | 0: n/a | |
| 15 | Mixed | 17.8 | No | L2, L4 | 0: n/a | 2: 0.5, 2 | |
| 6 | Boston Terrier | 16.7 | Yes | R3 | 1: 8 | 0: n/a | |
| 8 | German Shepherd | 39.5 | Yes | R5 | 1: 4 | 0: n/a | |
| 12 | Saluki | 29.5 | Yes | R3, R5 | 2: 3, 8 | 0: n/a |
Abbreviations: L: left, R: right; n/a: Not applicable
* A second surgery was performed on Case #3 for mammary tumor recurrence
Fig 1Representative intraoperative images of fluorescent malignant tumors.
A) 5 cm papillary adenoma with low grade ductal adenocarcinoma. B) 7 cm intermediate grade carcinoma. C) 3 cm low grade carcinoma. In this case, one of the non-fluorescent margins is obscured by specimen positioning.
Tumor fluorescence and fluorescence sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for malignancy stratified by tumor size and histopathology (benign vs malignant).
| Tumor Size | Malignant N (SBR Range) | Benign N (SBR Range) | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40% | 54.5% | 0.29 | 0.67 | |||
| Fluorescent | 2 (1.6) | 5 (1.1–1.4) | ||||
| Non-Fluorescent | 3 (0.9–1.0) | 6 (0.9–1.1) | ||||
| 90.9% | 30.0% | 0.59 | 0.3 | |||
| Fluorescent | 10 (1.4–2.1) | 7 (1.2–1.8) | ||||
| Non-Fluorescent | 1 | 3 (0.8–1.1) | ||||
| 100.0% | N/A | 1.0 | N/A | |||
| Fluorescent | 4 (1.3–1.7) | 0 | ||||
| Non-Fluorescent | 0 | 0 |
* One tumor malignant tumor that did not fluoresce was surrounded by a dense fibrous capsule
N = number; SBR = signal to background ratio
PPV = Positive predictive value
NPV = Negative predictive value
Fig 2Intraoperative images from case 15.
A) The lumpectomy specimen is being elevated from the operative field. The primary tumor was surrounded by dense connective tissue and was not fluorescent. B) Fluorescence was seen in the wound bed following resection of the primary tumor. Biopsy of this area demonstrated mammary carcinoma.
Results of NIR imaging and histopathology in subjects with residual wound bed fluorescence.
| Case Number | Maximum SBR of Primary Tumors | Final Pathologies of Primary Tumors | SBR of Residual Fluorescence | Final Pathology of Additional Biopsy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 | Adenoma Complex adenoma Ductal adenoma | 1.3 | Normal muscle | |
| 1.5 | Mammary carcinoma | 1.6 | Lobular hyperplasia | |
| 1.8 | Mammary carcinoma | 1.5 | Suture granuloma | |
| 1.6 | Complex adenoma | 1.5 | Normal linea | |
| 1.0 | Mammary carcinoma | 2.2 | Mammary carcinoma |
Abbreviations: SBR: signal-to-background ratio
Fig 3Intraoperative images from case 3b.
A) Tumor fluorescence could be seen through the skin prior to any dissection (circle). B) 2 cm mammary carcinoma on the back table following resection. C) Fluorescent lymph node with metastatic disease (circle). The background fluorescence was associated with suture granulomas and inflammation associated with the previous surgery.
Summary of tumor and lymph node fluorescence for specimens with inguinal lymph nodes identified.
| Case | Mammary Glands Involved | Tumor Size (cm) | Maximum Tumor SBR | Tumor Pathology | LN SBR | Final Histopathology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L5, R5 | 3, 4 | 1.8 | Mammary carcinoma | 1.6 | Mammary carcinoma | |
| R2, R3, R4, R5, L3 | 0.2, 4, 5, 4, 3 | 1.5 | Adenoma (R2), Ductal carcinoma (R4) | 1.3 | Drainage reaction | |
| L3, L4 | 0.5, 1 | 1.4 | Complex adenoma | 1: NF | Drainage reaction | |
| L3 | 3 | 1.6 | Mammary carcinoma | 1.7 | Drainage reaction | |
| L2, L4 | 0.5, 2 | 1.2 | Lobular hyperplasia, complex adenoma | 1: NF | Drainage reaction | |
| R5 | 4 | 1.0 | Mammary carcinoma | 1.6 | Mammary carcinoma | |
| R3, R5 | 3, 8 | 1.7 | Mammary carcinoma | 1: NF | Drainage reaction |
Abbreviations: SBR signal-to-background ratio, LN lymph node, L left, R right, NF non-fluorescent
* “Drainage reaction”: Mild lymphoid hyperplasia with increased numbers of histiocytes, plasma cells, and erythrocytes in the subcapsular trabeculae and medullary sinuses.