Back

3D-printed moulds of renal tumours for image-guided tissue sampling in the clinical setting

Mireia, C.-O.; Gehrung, M.; Ursprung, S.; Gill, A. B.; Warren, A. Y.; Gallagher, F. A.; Mitchell, T. J.; Mendichovszky, I. A.; Priest, A. N.; Stewart, G. D.; Sala, E.; Markowetz, F.

2019-06-03 bioengineering
10.1101/658831 bioRxiv
Show abstract

PURPOSESpatial heterogeneity of tumours is a major challenge in precision oncology. The relationship between molecular and imaging heterogeneity is still poorly understood, as it relies on the accurate co-registration of medical images and tissue biopsies. tumour moulds can guide the localization of biopsies, but their creation is time consuming, technologically challenging, and difficult to interface with routine clinical practice. These hurdles have so far hindered the progress in the area of multiscale integration of tumour heterogeneity data. METHODSWe have developed an open source computational framework to automatically produce patient-specific 3D-printed moulds that can be used in the clinical setting. Our approach achieves accurate co-registration of sampling location between tissue and imaging, and integrates seamlessly with clinical, imaging and pathology workflows. RESULTSWe applied our framework to patients with renal cancer undergoing radical nephrectomy. We created personalised moulds for five patients, obtaining Dice similarity coefficients between imaging and tissue sections ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 for tumour regions, and between 0.70 and 0.76 for healthy kidney. The framework required minimal manual intervention, producing the final mould design in just minutes, while automatically taking into account clinical considerations such as a preference for specific cutting planes. CONCLUSIONOur work provides a robust and automated interface between imaging and tissue samples, enabling the development of clinical studies to probe tumour heterogeneity on multiple spatial scales.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.