| Literature DB >> 33028666 |
Jing Chen1, Yang Jiang2, Tse-Shao Chang3, Bishnu Joshi1, Juan Zhou1, Joel H Rubenstein1, Erik J Wamsteker1, Richard S Kwon1, Henry Appelman4, David G Beer5, Danielle K Turgeon1, Eric J Seibel6, Thomas D Wang7,3,8.
Abstract
Entities:
Keywords: Barrett's oesophagus; clinical trials; fluorescence endoscopy; imaging; peptides
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33028666 PMCID: PMC8108279 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322945
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gut ISSN: 0017-5749 Impact factor: 31.793
Figure 1Fluorescently labelled peptides for multiplexed imaging. Biochemical structures are shown for (A) QRH*-Cy5 and (B) KSP*-IRDye800. (C) Peak absorbance of QRH*-Cy5 and KSP*-IRDye800 occurs at abs=648 and 776 nm, respectively. Peak fluorescence emits at em=675 and 812 nm, respectively. (D) Schematic diagram for the multimodal scanning fibre endoscope (mmSFE) is shown. Excitation at ex=638 and 785 nm is delivered through a single-mode fibre (SMF) that is scanned in a spiral pattern by a piezo tube actuator. The beam is focused onto the tissue surface (illumination plane) by a lens assembly. (E) Fluorescence is collected by a ring of large core multi-mode fibres (MMF) mounted around the instrument periphery. (F) The dimensions of the rigid tip are 9 mm in length and 2.4 mm in diameter. (G) This instrument passes forward through the 2.7 mm working channel of a standard medical endoscope (Olympus #GIF-HQ190). (H) The system is contained within a portable cart.
Patient demographics
| Age | Gender | Prague/stage | Tissue sampling | Pathology |
| 68 | M | C0M0I0 | EMR/biopsy | SQ |
| 57 | M | C0M0I0 | biopsy | SQ |
| 84 | F | C0M0I9 | biopsy | NDBE |
| 60 | M | C0M1 | EMR/biopsy | NDBE |
| 56 | M | C1M3 | EMR/biopsy | NDBE |
| 57 | M | C7M9 | biopsy | LGD |
| 56 | F | C0M1 | biopsy | LGD |
| 80 | F | C0M0I0 | biopsy | LGD |
| 67 | M | C0M0I7 | EMR/biopsy | LGD |
| 79 | F | C0M2 | biopsy | HGD |
| 88 | M | C0M3 | EMR/biopsy | HGD |
| 79 | M | C0M1I1.5 | EMR/biopsy | HGD |
| 85 | M | C12M13 | biopsy | HGD |
| 79 | M | C4M5 | biopsy | HGD |
| 66 | M | C0M0 | biopsy | HGD |
| 60 | M | C9M10 | biopsy | HGD |
| 75 | M | T3N1 | biopsy | EAC |
| 73 | F | C0M0I2 | EMR/biopsy | EAC |
| 81 | M | C10M10 | biospy† | EAC |
| 71 | M | C9M12I13 | EMR/biopsy | EAC |
| 55 | F | T1a | biopsy | EAC |
| 64 | F | C0M1 | EMR/biopsy | EAC |
Multiplexed images were collected in vivo from the distal oesophagus of n=22 patients with a mean (±SD) age of 70.0±10.8 years. SQ, NDBE and LGD were identified in a total of n=2, 3 and 4 subjects, respectively. HGD and EAC were found in n=7 and 6 subjects, respectively. Modified Prague classification includes length in centimetres of circumferential Barrett’s oesophagus (C), maximal tongue (M) and any proximal island (I). These findings were confirmed by histopathology from either EMR or biopsy.
*No tissue sampling performed at time of fluorescence imaging. Pathology based on findings from the most recent pathological reports before and after the imaging procedure.
†A mass was found in the thoracic oesophagus and the tissue diagnosis was obtained prior to this exam.
EAC, oesophageal adenocarcinoma; EMR, endoscopic mucosalresection; HGD, high-grade dysplasia; LGD, low-grade dysplasia; NDBE, non-dysplasticBarrett’s oesophagus; SQ, squamous.
Figure 2Barrett’s oesophagus. Representative in vivo images collected endoscopically are shown from patients with (A) squamous (SQ), (B) non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus (NDBE), (C) high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and (D) oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The presence of NDBE is identified by the salmon red patches (arrows) in the white light images. Fluorescence images are collected after separate topical administration of QRH*-Cy5 and KSP*-IRDye800. The merged images show high contrast regions-of interest (ROI) where EGFR and ErbB2 (orange) are coexpressed. Coregistered reflectance images provide anatomical landmarks to interpret the location of the ROI’s.
Figure 3In vivo imaging performance. Scatter plot shows target/background (T/B) ratios measured for EGFR and ErbB2 expression in the fluorescence images collected in vivo from the distal oesophagus of n=22 patients. Decision boundaries show regions classified as either negative (blue) or positive (brown) for neoplasia using (A) support vector machine (SVM) and (B) logistic regression (LR) trained on all data. (C) ROC curves for classifying HGD/EAC from SQ/NDBE/LGD are shown using SVM and LR algorithms with leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV). (D) Average ROC curves from bootstrap using SVM (AUC=0.97) model trained on all data show that multiplexed detection provides improved performance than using either EGFR (AUC=0.95) or ErbB2 alone (AUC=0.94). AUC, area under curve; EGFR. epithelial growth factor receptor; ErbB2. epithelial growth factor receptor2; ROC, receiver-operator characteristic.