4.5 Article

Towards the Optical Detection of Field Cancerization in the Buccal Mucosa of Patients with Lung Cancer

Journal

TRANSLATIONAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 12, Issue 12, Pages 1533-1538

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranon.2019.07.018

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Dutch Cancer Society [TNO 2014e7074]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

INTRODUCTION: An increase in detection of early-stage asymptomatic lung tumors could increase the overall survival rate of lung cancer patients. A new approach to cancer (pre-)screening focusses on detecting field cancerization instead of the tumor itself. The objective of this study was to investigate the use of optical spectroscopy to detect field cancerization in the buccal mucosa of lung cancer patients. METHODS: Optical buccal mucosa measurements were performed in lung cancer patients and controls using multidiameter single-fiber reflectance spectroscopy. We analyzed whether the measured optical parameters could distinguish lung cancer patients from controls. RESULTS: Twenty-three lung cancer patients, 24 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) control patients, and 36 non-COPD controls were included. The majority of tumors were non-small-cell lung carcinomas (96%) and classified as stage I (48%). The tissue scattering properties mu(s)' and gamma at 800 nm and the tissue bilirubin concentration were all near-significantly different (P = .072, 0.058, and 0.060, respectively) between the lung cancer and COPD group. mu(s)' at 800 nm had a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 63%. The microvascular blood oxygen saturation of the lung cancer patients was also higher than the COPD patients (78% vs. 62%, P = .002), this is probably a consequence of the systemic effect of COPD. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that mu(s)' at 800 nm is increased in the buccal mucosa of patients with lung cancer compared to controls with COPD. This might be an indication of field cancerization in the oral cavity of patients with lung cancer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available