Evidence Hub

Virtual histology imaging of lymph nodes via dynamic full-field optical coherence tomography and deep learning to differentiate metastasis

Zhang S, Yang H, Zhang Y, Li X, Zhao J, Zhang Y, Xue P, Kang H et al.

Cancer biology & medicine, 2026

155 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The current pathological diagnosis of lymph node metastasis is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and dependent on sectioning of paraffin blocks. Herein, in a prospective cohort of patients with breast cancer, we validated dynamic full-field optical coherence tomography (D-FFOCT), a virtual pathology tool integrating deep learning for nodal metastasis detection, and offering rapid and label-free histologic approximations of fresh tissues.

METHODS: In a prospective dual-center cohort of 155 patients with breast cancer, 747 freshly bisected lymph node slides were obtained via D-FFOCT. Surgeons interpreted each slide with histopathology as the gold standard. A deep learning model was trained on 28,911 patches (corresponding to 590 slides) and tested on 7,736 patches (corresponding to 157 slides). The results were mapped to the slide level for potential intraoperative evaluation.

RESULTS: D-FFOCT strongly correlated with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained histological images. Surgeons achieved 97.10% specificity in nodal diagnosis with D-FFOCT. The performance of the artificial intelligence (AI) model was not inferior to that of human experts and had a sensitivity/specificity of 87.88%/91.94% and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.899 at the slide level. The human-AI collaborative system reduced labor requirements by 75% and increased the specificity by 6.5%, to 98.39%.

CONCLUSIONS: D-FFOCT has excellent potential as a tool for assessing…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 155 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free