3.9 Article

Diagnostic model based on Raman spectra of normal, hyperplasia and prostate adenocarcinoma tissues in vitro

Journal

SPECTROSCOPY-BIOMEDICAL APPLICATIONS
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 89-102

Publisher

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.1155/2011/864710

Keywords

Raman spectroscopy; prostate cancer; benign prostatic hyperplasia; Principal Components Analysis (PCA); Mahalanobis distance; biochemical model

Funding

  1. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico) [305610/2008-2]
  2. FAPESP (Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo) [2009/01788-5]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the use of Raman spectroscopy to identify the spectral differences between normal (N), benign hyperplasia (BPH) and adenocarcinoma (CaP) in fragments of prostate biopsies in vitro with the aim of developing a spectral diagnostic model for tissue classification. A dispersive Raman spectrometer was used with 830 nm wavelength and 80 mW excitation. Following Raman data collection and tissue histopathology (48 fragments diagnosed as N, 43 as BPH and 14 as CaP), two diagnostic models were developed in order to extract diagnostic information: the first using PCA and Mahalanobis analysis techniques and the second one a simplified biochemical model based on spectral features of cholesterol, collagen, smooth muscle cell and adipocyte. Spectral differences between N, BPH and CaP tissues, were observed mainly in the Raman bands associated with proteins, lipids, nucleic and amino acids. The PCA diagnostic model showed a sensitivity and specificity of 100%, which indicates the ability of PCA and Mahalanobis distance techniques to classify tissue changes in vitro. Also, it was found that the relative amount of collagen decreased while the amount of cholesterol and adipocyte increased with severity of the disease. Smooth muscle cell increased in BPH tissue. These characteristics were used for diagnostic purposes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available