Assessment of resection margins during breast-conserving surgery using multimodal optical coherence tomography

Background. Breast cancer (BC) has been ranked first in morbidity and mortality among the female population in Russian Federation for several years. Rapid and accurate intraoperative examination of the cleanliness of resection margins is the main condition for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to reduce the risks of local recurrence.

Aim. To examine the tumor margins and assess the cleanliness of the resection margins in BCS in patients diagnosed with BC using multimodal optical coherence tomography (MM OCT) with comparative planned histological and additional molecular genetic analysis.

Materials and methods. The study was carried out on postoperative samples of tumor and non-tumor breast tissue obtained from 115 patients with BC T1–2N0M0G_2–3 stage IA–IIA, after BCS in the volume of radical resection or lumpectomy with histological control of the resection margins. A spectral domain MM OCT device (OCT 1300-E, BioMedTech LLC, Russia) was used, which provides structural OCT images to study the backscattering properties of tissue and allows performing a quantitative assessment of the elastic properties of the tissue by compression optical coherence elastography (OCE).

Results. The MM OCT method was able to determine the exact margins between the tumor and non-tumor breast tissue. The main signs of the tumor were a decrease in the level and depth of penetration of the OCT signal in the structural OCT images, as well as an increase in the stiffness values (>200 kPa) in the OCE images with the highest stiffness values (>600 kPa) in the area of tumor cell accumulations. The use of compression OCE made it possible to detect clusters of tumor cells in the margins of resection at a distance of 5 mm from the visible border of the tumor. Among the 132 studied resection margins in 6 cases, the positive resection margin was determined by the OCE method, which was subsequently confirmed histologically. The negative resection margins were characterized by the lowest stiffness values (<200 kPa) in the OCE images and were confirmed by both histological analysis and molecular genetic analysis. ROC-analysis established a threshold stiffness value of 159.8 kPa, which indicates the presence of tumor tissue at the resection margins in the presence of a high stiffness area larger than 500 µm. The high diagnostic accuracy of the OCE method (98.5 %) was determined to distinguish between the negative and positive resection margins during BCS.

Conclusion. The use of MM OCT with OCE modality makes it possible to clearly distinguish different types of breast tissue in BC (adipose tissue, connective tissue, accumulation of tumor cells). MM OCT can be used as an additional intraoperative tool for visualizing tumor cells boundaries and assessing the cleanliness of resection margins in real time during BCS.

1. Sung H., Ferlay J., Siegel R.L. et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71(3):209–49. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660

2. Pozhariskiy K.M., Kuidabergenova A.G., Savelov N.A. et al. Clinical recommendations of the Russian Society of Oncomammologists on pathoanatomic research of breast cancer. Russian Society of Oncomammologists, 2016. Pp. 1–15. (In Russ.)

3. Semiglazov V.F., Semiglazov V.V., Nikolaev K.S. et al. Control of surgical edges of resection in the organ-preserving treatment of breast cancer. Onkokhirurgiya = Oncosurgery 2014;(1):58–63. (In Russ.)

4. Houssami N., Macaskill P., Marinovich M.L. et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:3219–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.07.043

5. Esbona K., Li Z., Wilke L.G. Intraoperative imprint cytology and frozen section pathology for margin assessment in breast conservation surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncology 2012;19(10):3236–45. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2492-2

6. Bondarchuk Ya.I., Zhiltsova E.K., Krivorotko P. V. et al. Intraoperative evaluation of the resection margin with the usage of digital two-point sectorography (Faxitron PathVision). Opukholi zhenskoy reproduktivnoy sistemy = Tumors of female reproductive system 2022;18(4):43–51. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17650/1994-4098-2022-18-4-43-51

7. Schmitt J.M. OCT elastography: imaging microscopic deformation and strain of tissue. Opt Express 1998;3:199. DOI: 10.1364/oe.3.000199

8. Sigrist R.M.S., Liau J., Kaffas A.E. et al. Ultrasound elastography: review of techniques and clinical applications. Theranostics 2017;7:1303–29. DOI: 10.7150/thno.18650

9. Barr R.G. Breast elastography: How to perform and integrate into a “best-practice” patient treatment algorithm. J Ultrasound Med 2020;39:7–17. DOI: 10.1002/jum.15137

10. Busko E.A., Mishchenko A.V., Semiglazov V.V. Determination of the threshold value of the sonoelastographic stiffness coefficient in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast formations. Kremlevskaya meditsina. Klinicheskiy vestnik = Kremlin Medicine. Clinical Bulletin 2013;(1):112–5. (In Russ.)

11. Busko E.A., Semiglazov V.V., Mishenko A.V. et al. The effectiveness of multiparametric ultrasound examination using compression elastography in the early diagnosis of breast formations. Luchevaya diagnostika i terapiya = Radiation diagnostics and therapy 2019;4(10):6–13. (In Russ.)

12. Schmidt H., Connolly C., Jaffer S. et al. Evaluation of surgically excised breast tissue microstructure using wide-field optical coherence tomography. Breast 2020;26(5):917–3. DOI: 10.1111/tbj.13663

13. Zysk A.M., Chen K., Gabrielson E. et al. Intraoperative assessment of final margins with a handheld optical imaging probe during breast-conserving surgery may reduce the reoperation rate: results of a multicenter study. Ann Surg Oncol 2015;22(10):3356–62. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4665-2

14. Gubarkova E.V., Sovetsky A.A., Zaitsev V.Y. et al. OCT-elastography-based optical biopsy for breast cancer delineation and express assessment of morphological/molecular subtypes. Biomed Opt Express 2019;10(5):2244–63. DOI: 10.1364/BOE.10.002244

15. Kennedy K.M., Zilkens R., Allen W.M. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative micro-elastography for margin assessment in breast-conserving surgery. Cancer Res 2020;80(8):1773–83. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-1240

16. Morrow M., Van Zee K.J., Solin L.J. et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. Pract Radiat Oncol 2016;6(5):287–95. DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2016.06.011

17. Moran M.S., Schnitt S.J., Giuliano A.E. et al. Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014;32(14):1507–15. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.3935

18. Houssami N., Macaskill P., Marinovich M.L. et al. The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with earlystage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:717–30. DOI: 10.1245/ s10434-014-3480-5

19. Gelikonov V.M., Romashov V.N., Shabanov D.V. et al. Cross-polarization optical coherence tomography with active maintenance of the circular polarization of a sounding wave in a common path system. Radiophysics Quantum Electronics 2018;60:897–911. DOI: 10.1007/s11141-018-9856-9

20. Zaitsev V.Y., Matveyev A.L., Matveev L.A. et al. Strain and elasticity imaging in compression optical coherence elastography: The two-decade perspective and recent advances. J Biophotonics 2021;14. DOI: 10.1002/jbio.202000257

21. Zaitsev V.Y., Matveyev A.L., Matveev L.A. et al. Practical obstacles and their mitigation strategies in compressional optical coherence elastography of biological tissues. J Innov Opt Health Sci 2017;10:1742006. DOI: 10.1142/S1793545817420068

22. Matveyev A.L., Matveev L.A., Sovetsky A.A. et al. Vector method for strain estimation in phase-sensitive optical coherence elastography. Laser Phys Lett 2018;15:065603. DOI: 10.1088/1612-202X/aab5e9

23. Gubarkova E.V., Sovetsky A.A., Matveev L.A. et al. Nonlinear elasticity assessment with optical coherence elastography for high-selectivity differentiation of breast cancer tissues. Materials 2022;15:3308. DOI: 10.3390/ma15093308

24. Osipov L.V. Elastography technologies in ultrasound diagnostics (review). Meditsinskiy alfavit. Diagnosticheskaya radiologiya i onkoterapiya = Medical alphabet. Diagnostic Radiology and Oncotherapy 2013;(3–4):5–21. (In Russ.)

25. Barellini L., Marcasciano M., Lo Torto F. et al. Intraoperative ultrasound and oncoplastic combined approach: an additional tool for the oncoplastic surgeon to obtain tumor-free margins in breast conservative surgery – a 2-year single-center prospective study. Clin Breast Cancer 2020;20(3):e290–e294. DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2019.10.004

26. Zikiryakhodzhaev A.D., Ermoshenkova M.V., Suhotko A.S. et al. Indications and technology for determining the edges of resection during organ-preserving operations for breast cancer. Onkologiya i khirurgiya = Oncology and surgery 2015;(1):14–24. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17116/onkolog2015454-7

27. Villiger M., Lorenser D., McLaughlin R.A. et al. Deep tissue volume imaging of birefringence through fibre-optic needle probes for the delineation of breast tumour. Sci Rep 2016;6:28771. DOI: 10.1038/srep28771