Back

Discrimination of Vocal Folds Lesions by Multiclass Classification using Autofluorescence Spectroscopy

Gaiffe, O.; Mahdjoub, J.; Ramasso, E.; Mauvais, O.; Lihoreau, T.; Pazart, L.; Wacogne, B.; Tavernier, L.

2023-05-12 otolaryngology
10.1101/2023.05.11.23289778 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesThe diagnosis of vocal fold cancer currently relies on invasive surgical biopsies, which can compromise laryngeal function. Distinguishing between different types of laryngeal lesions without invasive tissue sampling is therefore crucial. Autofluorescence spectroscopy (AFS) has proved to be efficient as a non-invasive detection technique but has yet to be fully exploited in the context of a multi-class tissue analysis. This study evaluates whether AFS can be used to discriminate between different types of laryngeal lesions in view of assisting in vocal fold surgery and preoperative investigations. Materials and methodsEx vivo spectral autofluorescence scans were recorded for each sample using a 405-nm laser excitation. A total of 1308 spectra were recorded from 29 vocal fold samples obtained from 23 patients. Multiclass analysis was conducted on the spectral data, classifying lesions either as normal, benign, dysplastic, or carcinoma. The results were compared to histopathological diagnosis. ResultsThrough an appropriate selection of spectral components and a cascading classification approach based on artificial neural networks (ANN), a classification rate of 97% was achieved for each lesion class, compared to 52% using autofluorescence intensity. ConclusionThe study demonstrates the effectiveness of AFS combined with multivariate analysis for accurate classification of vocal fold lesions. Comprehensive spectral data analysis significantly improves classification accuracy, even in challenging situations such as distinguishing between malignant and premalignant or benign lesions. This method could provide a way to perform in situ mapping of tissue states for minimally-invasive biopsy and surgical resection margins.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Applied Sciences
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.0%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.3%
4
Journal of Biophotonics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.4%
6
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
7
Journal of Biomedical Optics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
8
Biomedical Optics Express
84 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
9
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
10
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.9%
11
Cells
232 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
12
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
13
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
14
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
15
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
16
Neurophotonics
37 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
17
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
19
Translational Vision Science & Technology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
20
Analytical Chemistry
205 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Journal of Neurotrauma
27 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
23
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
25
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
27
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%