4.6 Article

Vibrational biospectroscopy coupled with multivariate analysis extracts potentially diagnostic features in blood plasma/serum of ovarian cancer patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOPHOTONICS
卷 7, 期 3-4, 页码 200-209

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jbio.201300157

关键词

ATR-FTIR spectroscopy; biospectroscopy; blood; ovarian cancer; PCA-LDA; Raman spectroscopy

资金

  1. EPSRC [EP/K023349/1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/K023349/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K023349/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. Natural Environment Research Council [ceh010010] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite numerous advances in omics research, early detection of ovarian cancer still remains a challenge. The aim of this study was to determine whether attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) or Raman spectroscopy could characterise alterations in the biomolecular signatures of human blood plasma/serum obtained from ovarian cancer patients compared to non-cancer controls. Blood samples isolated from ovarian cancer patients (n = 30) and healthy controls (n = 30) were analysed using ATR-FTIR spectroscopy. For comparison, a smaller cohort of samples (n = 8) were analysed using an InVia Renishaw Raman spectrometer. Resultant spectra were pre-processed prior to being inputted into principal component analysis (PCA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA). Statistically significant differences (P < 0.001) were observed between spectra of ovarian cancer versus control subjects for both biospectroscopy methods. Using a support vector machine classifier for Raman spectra of blood plasma, a diagnostic accuracy of 74% was achieved, while the same classifier showed 93.3% accuracy for IR spectra of blood plasma. These observations suggest that a biospectroscopy approach could be applied to identify spectral alterations associated with the presence of insidious ovarian cancer. ((c) 2014 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据