Week 4

Week 4 of this program has been the most exciting and interesting week yet! I had the chance to shadow Dr. Carolyn Eisen of Weill Cornell Imaging on Tuesday. While there, I was able to observe a wide variety of procedures and images involving breast cancer screening and biopsies. Before each biopsy, Dr. Eisen showed me the patient’s mammograms and/or ultrasound images. She helped explain what the different anatomical features were, as well as which parts looked suspicious and why they were of concern. Having taken a class this past semester on cancer (Cancer for Engineers and Physicists), I was able to understand most of the words, phrases, and acronyms that she was using! After analyzing the images, we went into the biopsy room to take cores from the area of concern. The three biopsy modalities I observed were stereotactic, tomosynthesis, and ultrasound-guided. The stereotactic and tomosynthesis biopsies were mostly computer-guided and automated procedures. These techniques were used for patients with small calcifications that would be difficult to see using ultrasound. In both techniques, an x-ray mammogram was performed, and Dr. Eisen highlighted the region of interest on the computer. The computer then came back with exact x, y, and z coordinates of the site, and gave live updates of the current position of the core-needle. Another mammogram was performed to ensure that the needle was in the correct location. Dr. Eisen then took 12 cores and analyzed them under x-ray to confirm that her samples contained the calcifications.

The ultrasound-guided technique was more manual than the other two modalities. Dr. Eisen held an ultrasound probe over the mass of interested while simultaneously inserting a core-needle to take a single core sample. The ultrasound allowed her to see when she was in the correct location and the process was repeated until she had about 5 cores. All the biopsy samples were placed in formalin to be analyzed by pathology.

It was very interesting to see how the different patients reacted to various situations, which brought a more human aspect to my research. Sometimes patients would start crying because they were going to have a biopsy and were scared about what the results would find. Some patients wanted to be distracted during the whole procedure. For example, one patient asked me to talk about my research throughout the procedure to keep her mind occupied.

In lab this week, we started more nanoparticle radiolabeling studies. We radiolabeled particles under two different conditions: at 25°C and at 37°C. In the clinical trials, they have been using 25°C, but we suspected that performing the conjugation at 37°C would be better in terms of improved labeling efficiency and stability over time. So far, the results appear to agree with this hypothesis. We injected mice with the two sets of particles to see whether the samples differ with regards to in vivo stability and biodistribution.

Last week, we had a patient with a brain tumor from our clinical trial come in. Said patient was injected with radiolabeled nanoparticles and various images were taken of the resected brain tumor. These images included autoradiography and fluorescence images to show the dual-modality efficacy of our particles in a clinical setting.

Outside of lab, I went to Roosevelt Island to watch the fireworks on July 4^th. I also won the lottery for The Lion King on Monday and was able to take Raisa to see it! It was absolutely amazing, and I cannot wait to see more shows!