4.5 Article

Endogenous optical biomarkers of ovarian cancer evaluated with multiphoton microscopy

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 16, 期 10, 页码 2048-2057

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0009

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA098341, R01 CA098341] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Among gynecologic cancers, ovarian cancer is the second most common and has the highest mortality. Currently, there is no accurate early diagnostic technique for ovarian cancer. Furthermore, little is understood regarding the early progression of this disease. We have imaged multiphoton interactions of endogenous tissue constituents from normal and abnormal ovarian biopsies that were kept viable during transport from the operating room and microscopy. Experimental Design: The ovarian surface and underlying stroma were assessed with two-photon excited fluorescence (2PEF) and second harmonic generation (SHG). High-resolution, optically sectioned images were analyzed for epithelial morphology based on 2PEF and collagen density and structural integrity based on SHG. Additionally, multiwavelength 2PEF provided an estimation of the cellular redox ratio of epithelial cells. Results: Normal tissue exhibited a uniform epithelial layer with highly structured collagen in the stroma, whereas abnormal tissue exhibited varied epithelium with large cells and substantial quantitative changes to the collagen structure. Samples from patients at high risk for developing ovarian cancer (based on their personal/family history of cancer) exhibited highly variable cellular redox ratios and changes in collagen structure that trended toward cancer samples. Conclusion: This study highlights differences in endogenous signals in viable ovarian biopsies based on quantitative collagen structural changes and redox ratio estimates that may lead to improved detection and further insights in ovarian cancer, particularly in the early stages of the disease.

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

4.5
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