Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Aug 31;15(8):e0234165. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234165

Full-field optical coherence tomography for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis

Thomas Maldiney 1,#, Hélène Greigert 1,2,#, Laurent Martin 2,3, Emilie Benoit 4, Catherine Creuzot-Garcher 5, Pierre-Henry Gabrielle 5, Jean-Marie Chassot 6, Claude Boccara 4,6, Daniel Balvay 7, Bertrand Tavitian 7,8, Olivier Clément 7,8, Sylvain Audia 1,2, Bernard Bonnotte 1,2,, Maxime Samson 1,2,‡,*
Editor: Stephan Meckel9
PMCID: PMC7458309  PMID: 32866179

Abstract

Histopathological examination of temporal artery biopsy (TAB) remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis (GCA) but is associated with essential limitations that emphasize the need for an upgraded pathological process. This study pioneered the use of full-field optical coherence tomography (FF-OCT) for rapid and automated on-site pathological diagnosis of GCA. Sixteen TABs (12 negative and 4 positive for GCA) were selected according to major histopathological criteria of GCA following hematoxylin-eosin-saffron-staining for subsequent acquisition with FF-OCT to compare structural modifications of the artery cell wall and thickness of each tunica. Gabor filtering of FF-OCT images was then used to compute TAB orientation maps and validate a potential automated analysis of TAB sections. FF-OCT allowed both qualitative and quantitative visualization of the main structures of the temporal artery wall, from the internal elastic lamina to the vasa vasorum and red blood cells, unveiling a significant correlation with conventional histology. FF-OCT imaging of GCA TABs revealed destruction of the media with distinct remodeling of the whole arterial wall into a denser reticular fibrous neo-intima, which is distinctive of GCA pathogenesis and accessible through automated Gabor filtering. Rapid on-site FF-OCT TAB acquisition makes it possible to identify some characteristic pathological lesions of GCA within a few minutes, paving the way for potential machine intelligence-based or even non-invasive diagnosis of GCA.

Introduction

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is a large vessel vasculitis that mainly affects the aorta and the branches of the external carotid, with a predilection for the temporal arteries [1]. Even though we now have an accurate understanding of its complex pathogenesis, the causative agent of GCA is still unknown [2]. Mostly occurring in northern European females between 50 and 80 years old, the predominant cranial phenotype is usually revealed by new-onset headache, temporal artery tenderness, jaw claudication, and partial or complete visual loss associated with possible systemic symptoms, notably fever, weight loss and weakness [3]. The critical complications of GCA include anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, stroke, aortic aneurysm or dissection; these serious complications being responsible for the prognosis of the disease and the need for prolonged high-dose glucocorticoid treatment [4].

The diagnosis of GCA usually relies on the association of concurrent clinical, biological and pathological features of vasculitis that are revealed by temporal artery biopsy (TAB) [5]. Significant advances in the field of medical imaging have improved the assessment of the extent of vasculitis and refined non-invasive diagnosis and follow-up [6,7]. For instance, the validity of hypoechoic thickening surrounding the temporal artery wall with color duplex sonography (CDS), also referred to as the halo sign, was confirmed at least three times in a meta-analysis for the diagnosis and follow-up of GCA [8]. However, the combination of intense infiltration of mononuclear cells in the three layers of the artery, fragmentation of the internal elastic lamina (IEL), intimal hyperplasia and neoangiogenesis on TAB histological examination undoubtedly remains the gold standard for GCA diagnosis in all study group guidelines [9,10].

Apart from rare local complications [11], TAB is a safe procedure [12]. Nevertheless, the segmental and focal nature of transmural inflammation in GCA generates skip lesions [13] and is responsible for a significant false-negative rate of up to 30% [14] that makes it necessary to either increase biopsy length [15] or to perform a contralateral TAB [16]. These limitations emphasize the potential interest and need for an upgraded pathological procedure dedicated to the diagnosis of GCA.

Based upon an optimization of the technology described by Fujimoto and colleagues in the early 1990s [17,18], full-field optical coherence tomography (FF-OCT) exploits en face white-light interference microscopy to provide not only ultra-high resolution images of biological structures [19] but also subcellular metabolic contrast in the tissue depth [20]. When compared to other modalities such as conventional OCT or even confocal microscopy, FF-OCT was demonstrated to significantly improve spatial resolution by a factor varying from five to ten depending on the acquisition axis [21]. Until now, most groups have focused on the potential role of FF-OCT during oncologic interventions as new routine approach to surgical pathology [22], and, except for one preliminary study in which the superficial temporal arteries were imaged with dermal OCT [23], there has been no reported attempt to employ high definition interference microscopy for the pathological diagnosis of GCA. The present work pursues the hypothesis that FF-OCT could help both the clinician and pathologist to improve TAB performance, and compares, for the first time, FF-OCT and conventional histological examination for the pathological diagnosis of GCA.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

Patients included in this study participated in two studies involving GCA patients (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158208 and NCT02857192) and gave both oral and written informed consent for the use of their temporal arteries for subsequent research in the field of GCA. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board and the Ethics Committee of the Dijon University Hospital.

Preparation of TAB sections

All patients suspected of GCA and scheduled for TAB surgery at the Dijon University Hospital Ophthalmology department from January 2013 to December 2016 were included. TAB was performed according to standard procedure, and fresh biopsies were sent to the pathology department. A ten millimeter segment was used for conventional hematoxylin-eosin-saffron (HES) staining, and the other part of the artery segment was immediately frozen at -196°C in fetal bovine serum and dimethyl sulfoxide (10%). The day of FF-OCT imaging, samples were slowly defrosted. The surrounding tissue was removed, and transversal 1 mm-thick sections were cut with a triangular-bladed scalped and placed in complete RPMI culture medium before placement on the sample holder for image acquisition.

Histological TAB selection

A total of sixteen TABs were selected for subsequent analysis with optical coherence microscopy. Twelve negative TABs were identified according to the absence of mononuclear cell infiltrate, IEL fragmentation or neoangiogenesis and defined as the control TABs. In these control samples, the pathologist studied the qualitative aspect of the temporal artery wall to distinguish between negative TAB with normal intima (thinner than media, referred to as niTAB.1 to 9, n = 9) and negative TAB with intimal hyperplasia (thicker than media, referred to as ihTAB.1 to 3, n = 3). These control TABs were compared to four specimens that met the major histopathological criteria for the diagnosis of GCA (referred to as gcaTAB.1 to 4, n = 4).

FF-OCT imaging

FF-OCT images were acquired with a commercially available FF-OCT apparatus (Light-CTScanner, LLTech SAS, Paris, France) [24]. Briefly, illumination was provided by a LED source with short coherence length ensuring a sectioning ability or axial resolution of 1 μm. In the FF-OCT set-up, 10x microscope objectives are placed in the interferometer arms in the Linnik configuration, bringing a transverse resolution of 1.5 μm. Following full-field illumination of the axial TAB section, FF-OCT images were captured with a complementary metal oxide semiconductor camera. The theoretical penetration depth for the TAB specimen was approximately 200 μm. The TAB section was placed in the dedicated sample holder with its revolution axis perpendicular to the imaging plane so that one FF-OCT slice showed the architecture of the TAB section from the lumen to the outer wall. A series of FF-OCT slices with 1.5 μm spacing were recorded in depth, and ImageJ 1.52o software was used for axial reconstruction of TAB FF-OCT imaging following z-stacking of a minimum of 20 images.

Image and statistical analysis

Quantitative FF-OCT image analysis and tunica thickness were accessible with a contrast-based ImageJ 1.52o protocol (Plot Profile Function) and calculated as the mean of three representative measurements throughout each TAB section. NDP.view software version 2.6.17, provided by Hamamatsu, allowed similar measurements from scanned glass slides following HES staining. Statistics were calculated using GraphPad Prism version 5. For intima-to-media ratios (I/M), values reported as medians and interquartile ranges were discriminated by Mann-Whitney tests. The Pearson r coefficient was calculated to evaluate the strength of the linear correlation between histology and FF-OCT measurements of media or intima thicknesses. Interval two-tailed P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Finally, orientation maps were calculated for a selection of both healthy and GCA-positive TABs following Gabor filtering of the axial reconstructed images with a custom-made software based on Matlab 2018b (Matworks, Natick, MA).

Results

Qualitative FF-OCT imaging

Similar to histological preparation, TAB sections acquired with FF-OCT allow the identification of several important structures within the artery wall (Fig 1). Notably, the tripartite architecture is perceived with a clear separation between intima, media and adventitia (Fig 1A). Interestingly, the physical junction between the intima and media appears as a thin hypo-reflective serpentine band that most obviously corresponds to the IEL (Fig 1A, black arrow). Moreover, in Fig 1B and 1C obtained with FF-OCT, the vasa vasorum can be seen distinctly within the arterial wall and the red blood cells can be identified precisely, returning a spherical contrast highly similar to the one obtained with conventional histology (Fig 1D to 1F). Indeed, the vasa vasorum display similar architecture with both techniques, revealing small (20 to 80 μm) blood vessels characterized by thin elastic walls and a round to oval shape directly inserted into the outlying thread of the temporal artery (i.e. mostly between the media and the adventitia layers) (Fig 1B and 1E, white arrow shows arterial thrombi). Magnification of the lumen of the vasa vasorum makes it possible to observe the red blood cells. These cells resemble partially transparent pink-colored ovoid structures following HES staining or a collection of iso-reflective dots with a surrounding hypo-reflective annulus on direct FF-OCT acquisition (Fig 1C and 1F, black asterisk).

Fig 1.

Fig 1

FF-OCT acquisition and histological images from negative TAB samples are compared in Fig 2A to 2D. Fig 2A and 2B display a representative negative TAB specimen with a thin intimal layer (niTAB). Fig 2C and 2D show a negative TAB with intimal hyperplasia (hiTAB). No matter the group of negative TAB, the overall architecture of the vessels is preserved, and there is a clear distinction between intima, media and adventitia. Indeed, the tunica media displays a relative hyper-reflectivity on the image acquired with FF-OCT when compared with the tunica intima, whose thin muscle fibers mostly run parallel to the global circular orientation of the TAB section (see magnified region from Fig 2A and 2C). Similar conclusions regarding the differential contrast and circular symmetry within the two inner layers of the arterial wall separated by the IEL, which appears as a hypo-reflective strip in FF-OCT, can be drawn from the analysis of all negative TAB specimens (S1 and S2 Figs). In Fig 2A and 2C we can see that the tunica adventitia is constructed on a denser and more complex fibrous connective tissue that also seems to follow the overall circular symmetry of the system. When compared with Fig 2A, the FF-OCT-acquired TAB section from Fig 2C is characterized by an increased intima thickness (see magnified region). These observations can mostly be transposed for the comparison of all hiTAB specimens detailed in S1 and S2 Figs. The results obtained with FF-OCT analysis largely correlate with the data obtained after conventional histology (Fig 2B and 2D). Indeed, the intima in Fig 2B appears much thinner than in Fig 2D in which the intima is thicker than the media.

Fig 2.

Fig 2

In Fig 2E and 2F and S3 Fig, the TABs are positive for GCA. The conventional histopathological images show a relatively preserved media that is strongly infiltrated by T-cells, macrophages and multinucleated cells (see the magnified region from Fig 2F). By contrast, FF-OCT acquisition demonstrates a complete disruption of both regular reflectivity and circularity of the media and intima-associated connective tissue fibers due to the infiltration of inflammatory cells. This process remodels the structure of the artery into a denser, reticular, fibrous, collagen-rich structure responsible for both the progressive destruction of the media and the formation of a neo-intima (see the magnified region from Fig 2E). Fig 2E, obtained with FF-OCT, confirms the fragmentation of the internal elastic lamina along with a rebalancing of the contrasts throughout the netlike fibrous structure connecting all three layers. Similar to the corresponding image obtained with conventional histology (Fig 2F), there is no clear distinction between the intima and the media, which is consistent with the stage of the disease. The same conclusion can be drawn from S3 Fig, which shows the supporting material in which the reticular fibrous neo-intima almost completely obstructs the arterial lumen.

Quantitative FF-OCT imaging

Given that FF-OCT images provide good quality spatial resolution, we hypothesized that proper image analysis could return quantitative information regarding both the thickness of the artery wall layers and the global architecture of the underlying connective tissue. Fig 3A and 3B show the main aspects of contrast-based ImageJ protocol along a linear profile drawn across the arterial wall of a negative TAB section (Fig 3A). The protocol was designed to access the most precise measurements for each tunica of the vessel. The gray-scale plot profile from Fig 3B confirms a significant rupture in contrast between the intima and media, as well as between the media and adventitia, allowing concomitant measurements of the thickness of each artery wall layer. Software provided by Hamamatsu facilitated similar measurements from scanned glass slides following HES staining, as exploited elsewhere [25]. In addition, Gabor filtering was applied to the same reconstructed negative TAB section in order to provide vector orientation maps and subsequent global analysis of the symmetry of the arterial section (Fig 3C). As expected from the previous qualitative analysis, Gabor filtering of FF-OCT-acquired negative TAB section returned a perfect orientation match from one point of the artery to its exact opposite following a 180-degree rotation, as demonstrated by the paired color system respecting an overall 180-degree rotational symmetry. A similar procedure was applied for the analysis of the gray-scale plot profile from positive TAB sections (Fig 3D). Due to a high heterogeneous contrast within the whole TAB section of GCA patients, Fig 3E shows almost no possible distinction between the different layers composing the artery wall with a contrast oscillating between 500 and 2000 arbitrary units from the very inner to the outer layer. Subsequent Gabor filtering of the positive section proves the pathological loss of the 180 degree rotational symmetry-based vector orientation match, as illustrated by the relative chaotic color distribution within the layers of the artery resulting in a rainbow-like appearance (Fig 3F).

Fig 3.

Fig 3

Fig 4A shows an example of a negative TAB for which FF-OCT images and conventional histology match perfectly from the inner to the outer layer of the biopsy. Regardless of intima thickness or GCA status (when quantifiable for GCA patients), quantitative analysis of both intima and media thickness confirms the absence of statistical difference between FF-OCT-based and histology-based measurements of I/M (Fig 4B). Moreover, these results let to an accurate association of both quantitative classification and qualitative selection established by the pathologist for negative sections. Indeed, TABs with thin intima (S1 Fig) and TABs with intimal hyperplasia (S2 Fig) consequently appear as two separate groups: one with normal I/M <1 and another that shows an intimal hyperplastic response with I/M between 1 and 2. When data were accessible for TABs with GCA lesions, quantification brought out a third GCA group defined by I/M largely > 2. Finally, data from Fig 4C and 4D demonstrate a significant correlation between the thickness of the intima (Fig 4C) and media (Fig 4D) measured with FF-OCT and conventional histology.

Fig 4.

Fig 4

Discussion

The present work describes the first attempt to assess the potential of FF-OCT for the diagnosis of GCA in comparison with conventional histology. The first advantage of FF-OCT is that it provides rapid (within minutes) and on-site acquisition of TAB sections. We demonstrate, from the analysis of both healthy and GCA-positive TAB sections, that the high spatial resolution of FF-OCT technology makes it possible to visualize with precision several essential structures correlated with the diagnosis of GCA. Notably, we found that FF-OCT accurately returns both qualitative and quantitative information relative to the structure of the three arterial tissue layers and the IEL or vasa vasorum, with a significant correlation to histopathological imaging. When focusing on the FF-OCT analysis of healthy TAB sections, the inverted I/M can be interpreted as a reflection of the stage in human atherosclerosis [26]. Moreover, we provide preliminary proof that automated Gabor filtering could deliver both immediate and essential structural information regarding the preservation of the regular circularity of the media and intima-associated connective tissues, paving the way for potential machine intelligence-based pathological diagnosis of GCA. FF-OCT acquisitions return additional and complementary information with focus on the appearance and structural orientation of the underlying fibrous supporting tissue within each layer of the temporal artery. When TABs from GCA patients were compared to the global circular symmetry of healthy TAB sections, FF-OCT imaging revealed the destruction of the media layer and the modification of the arterial wall structure, which was rearranged into a denser reticular fibrous neo-intima, distinctive of GCA pathogenesis [27]. Despite the current success of non-invasive techniques like CDS, a precise FF-OCT-based analysis of the temporal artery wall on a meso-structural level remains of particular importance for the diagnosis of GCA. There is, however, a potential pitfall for GCA diagnosis with CDS since the atherosclerotic lesions responsible for significant increases in the thickness of the intima might mimic the halo sign, resulting in false positives [28].

We acknowledge several limitations that had an impact on the use of FF-OCT for rapid on-site pathological diagnosis of GCA in the current study. First, T-cells, macrophages and multinucleated cells, which are hallmarks of GCA, were not visible in the present set-up of FF-OCT, which used previously frozen TAB samples. Despite the high spatial resolution, the loss of information was due to the structural nature of contrast imaging, rendering direct black and white photographs of the specimen without any preparation or staining. However, this limitation is for the most part the result of using defrosted TAB samples with dead cellular material. This issue can be overcome by performing dynamic FF-OCT acquisition of fresh TAB sections, yielding complementary subcellular contrast [29] and putative direct visualization of inflammatory infiltrates. Moreover, FF-OCT-based image analysis allows z-stacking of a varying number of slices up to a cumulative length approaching 200 μm, highly dependent on the overall quality and sharpness of the initial TAB axial section, that may potentially improve diagnosis accuracy by unveiling skip lesions. Such hypothesis would require additional experiments with a dedicated reproducible sampling technique allowing concomitant and iterative acquisition of the same slice with both FF-OCT and conventional histology throughout the whole length TAB section. Unfortunately, such experimental conditions remains to be found. Finally, the potential of en face white-light interference microscopy demonstrated in this work should encourage further investigations into the FF-OCT-based handheld acquisition probe [30], a promising technology dedicated to direct transcutaneous imaging and further non-invasive diagnosis of GCA.

Conclusion

This preliminary study is the first to compare FF-OCT imaging to the gold standard histopathological procedure for the diagnosis of GCA. It brings conclusive proof regarding the potential of FF-OCT for both qualitative and quantitative structural visualization of underlying fibrous tissues and architectural changes in the arterial wall that occur throughout the inflammatory processes of GCA. After this first promising step, further investigations are warranted to confirm the potential of FF-OCT technology for rapid, on-site, non-invasive diagnosis of GCA.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Qualitative imaging of healthy TAB specimens with thin intima layer (n = 9).

Comparison of FF-OCT (A, C, E, G, I, K, M, O, Q) and conventional histology (B, D, F, H, J, L, N, P, R) imaging. A and B correspond to niTAB1, C and D to niTAB2, E and F to niTAB3, G and H to niTAB4, I and J to niTAB5, K and L to niTAB5, M and N to niTAB7, O and P to niTAB8, Q and R to niTAB9.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Qualitative imaging of healthy TAB specimens with significant intimal hyperplasia (n = 3).

Comparison of FF-OCT (A, C, E) and conventional histology (B, D, F) imaging. A and B correspond to the ihTAB1, C and D to ihTAB2, E and F to ihTAB3.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Qualitative imaging of GCA TAB specimens (n = 4).

Comparison of FF-OCT (A, C, E, G) and conventional histology (B, D, F, H) imaging. A and B correspond to gcaTAB1, C and D to gcaTAB2, E and F to gcaTAB3, G and H to gcaTAB4.

(TIF)

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Suzanne Rankin for her help in proofreading the article; Marion Ciudad, Marine Thébault, Claudie Cladière, Claire Gérard, Mathilde Charlot, Claire Boillin, Martine Breton, Amandine Esnoult, Thibault Ghesquière and Laetitia Barbier for their help in collecting samples; Céline Shaeffer, Eva Michaud and the Centre de Ressources Biologiques; Ferdinand Cabanne for their help in the conservation of frozen samples and Bertrand Le Conte de Poly for his help and advices in acquiring FF-OCT images at LLTech.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by grants from the 'Fondation ARTHRITIS (2017-2018)' and the 'Groupement Interrégional de Recherche Clinique et d’Innovation Est (GIRCI) - Appel à Projet Jeunes Chercheurs' 2013 and 2014 (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158208 and NCT02857192). The funder did not provide any salary for authors, had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section. LLTech SAS did not play any role as a funding organization for this study.

References

  • 1.Jennette JC, Falk RJ, Bacon PA, Basu N, Cid MC, Ferrario F, et al. 2012 Revised International Chapel Hill Consensus Conference Nomenclature of Vasculitides. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65: 1–11. 10.1002/art.37715 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Samson M, Corbera-Bellalta M, Audia S, Planas-Rigol E, Martin L, Cid MC, et al. Recent advances in our understanding of giant cell arteritis pathogenesis. Autoimmun Rev. 2017;16: 833–844. 10.1016/j.autrev.2017.05.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Dejaco C, Brouwer E, Mason JC, Buttgereit F, Matteson EL, Dasgupta B. Giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica: current challenges and opportunities. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2017;13: 578–592. 10.1038/nrrheum.2017.142 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Weyand CM, Goronzy JJ. Giant-Cell Arteritis and Polymyalgia Rheumatica. Solomon CG, editor. N Engl J Med. 2014;371: 50–57. 10.1056/NEJMcp1214825 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Buttgereit F, Dejaco C, Matteson EL, Dasgupta B. Polymyalgia Rheumatica and Giant Cell Arteritis: A Systematic Review. JAMA. 2016;315: 2442 10.1001/jama.2016.5444 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rinagel M, Chatelus E, Jousse-Joulin S, Sibilia J, Gottenberg J-E, Chasset F, et al. Diagnostic performance of temporal artery ultrasound for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Autoimmun Rev. 2019;18: 56–61. 10.1016/j.autrev.2018.07.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Dejaco C, Ramiro S, Duftner C, Besson FL, Bley TA, Blockmans D, et al. EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in large vessel vasculitis in clinical practice. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77: 636–643. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212649 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Monti S, Floris A, Ponte C, Schmidt WA, Diamantopoulos AP, Pereira C, et al. The use of ultrasound to assess giant cell arteritis: review of the current evidence and practical guide for the rheumatologist. Rheumatology. 2018;57: 227–235. 10.1093/rheumatology/kex173 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Bienvenu B, Ly KH, Lambert M, Agard C, André M, Benhamou Y, et al. Management of giant cell arteritis: Recommendations of the French Study Group for Large Vessel Vasculitis (GEFA). Rev Médecine Interne. 2016;37: 154–165. 10.1016/j.revmed.2015.12.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Sait MR, Lepore M, Kwasnicki R, Allington J, Balasubramanian R, Somasundaram SK, et al. The 2016 revised ACR criteria for diagnosis of giant cell arteritis–Our case series: Can this avoid unnecessary temporal artery biopsies? Int J Surg Open. 2017;9: 19–23. 10.1016/j.ijso.2017.09.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Gunawardene A, Chant H. Facial nerve injury during temporal artery biopsy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2014;96: 257–260. 10.1308/003588414X13814021679438 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Pieri A, Milligan R, Hegde V, Hennessy C. Temporal artery biopsy: are we doing it right? Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2013;26: 559–563. 10.1108/IJHCQA-06-2012-0055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Poller DN. The importance of skip lesions in temporal arteritis. J Clin Pathol. 2000;53: 137–139. 10.1136/jcp.53.2.137 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Nesher G. The diagnosis and classification of giant cell arteritis. J Autoimmun. 2014;48–49: 73–75. 10.1016/j.jaut.2014.01.017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Oh LJ, Wong E, Gill AJ, McCluskey P, Smith JEH. Value of temporal artery biopsy length in diagnosing giant cell arteritis: TAB length in GCA diagnosis. ANZ J Surg. 2018;88: 191–195. 10.1111/ans.13822 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Boyev LR, Miller NR, Green WR. Efficacy of unilateral versus bilateral temporal artery biopsies for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;128: 211–215. 10.1016/s0002-9394(99)00101-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Huang D, Swanson EA, Lin CP, Schuman JS, Stinson WG, Chang W, et al. Optical coherence tomography. Science. 1991;254: 1178–1181. 10.1126/science.1957169 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Fujimoto JG, Brezinski ME, Tearney GJ, Boppart SA, Bouma B, Hee MR, et al. Optical biopsy and imaging using optical coherence tomography. Nat Med. 1995;1: 970–972. 10.1038/nm0995-970 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Vabre L, Dubois A, Boccara AC. Thermal-light full-field optical coherence tomography. Opt Lett. 2002;27: 530–532. 10.1364/ol.27.000530 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Apelian C, Harms F, Thouvenin O, Boccara AC. Dynamic full field optical coherence tomography: subcellular metabolic contrast revealed in tissues by interferometric signals temporal analysis. Biomed Opt Express. 2016;7: 1511 10.1364/BOE.7.001511 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Dalimier E, Salomon D. Full-Field Optical Coherence Tomography: A New Technology for 3D High-Resolution Skin Imaging. Dermatology. 2012;224: 84–92. 10.1159/000337423 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.van Manen L, Dijkstra J, Boccara C, Benoit E, Vahrmeijer AL, Gora MJ, et al. The clinical usefulness of optical coherence tomography during cancer interventions. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2018;144: 1967–1990. 10.1007/s00432-018-2690-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Mollan SP, Keane PA, Denniston AK. The use of transdermal optical coherence tomography to image the superficial temporal arteries. Eye. 2017;31: 157–160. 10.1038/eye.2016.206 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ghouali W, Grieve K, Bellefqih S, Sandali O, Harms F, Laroche L, et al. Full-Field Optical Coherence Tomography of Human Donor and Pathological Corneas. Curr Eye Res. 2015;40: 526–534. 10.3109/02713683.2014.935444 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Gould PV, Saikali S. A Comparison of Digitized Frozen Section and Smear Preparations for Intraoperative Neurotelepathology. Anal Cell Pathol. 2012;35: 85–91. 10.1155/2012/454631 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Hazell LJ, Baernthaler G, Stocker R. Correlation between intima-to-media ratio, apolipoprotein B-100, myeloperoxidase, and hypochlorite-oxidized proteins in human atherosclerosis. Free Radic Biol Med. 2001;31: 1254–1262. 10.1016/s0891-5849(01)00717-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Samson M, Bonnotte B. Artérite à cellules géantes: nouveaux concepts. Presse Médicale. 2019;48: 917–918. 10.1016/j.lpm.2019.09.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.De Miguel E, Beltran LM, Monjo I, Deodati F, Schmidt WA, Garcia-Puig J. Atherosclerosis as a potential pitfall in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis. Rheumatology. 2018;57: 318–321. 10.1093/rheumatology/kex381 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Thouvenin O, Fink M, Boccara C. Dynamic multimodal full-field optical coherence tomography and fluorescence structured illumination microscopy. J Biomed Opt. 2017;22: 026004 10.1117/1.JBO.22.2.026004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Benoit a la Guillaume E, Martins F, Boccara C, Harms F. High-resolution handheld rigid endomicroscope based on full-field optical coherence tomography. J Biomed Opt. 2016;21: 026005 10.1117/1.JBO.21.2.026005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Stephan Meckel

3 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-14732

Full-field optical coherence tomography for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Maldiney,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

Please carefully address both reviewers' comments and make according revisions in the new version of your manuscript.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 17 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Stephan Meckel, MD, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please amend your Ethics statement by including approval numbers.

3.Thank you for stating the following in the Conflict of interest statement Section of your manuscript:

[All authors have no disclosure and no conflict of interest to declare. This work was supported by grants (MS) from the Fondation ARTHRITIS (2017-2018), the Groupement Interrégional Manuscript Click here to download Manuscript PLOS One Manuscript (Maldiney et al. 2020).docx FF-OCT for the diagnosis of GCA de Recherche Clinique et d’Innovation Est (GIRCI), Appel à Projet Jeunes Chercheurs 2013 and 2014 (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158208 and NCT02857192).]

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

 [The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.]

4.Thank you for stating the following in the Competing Interests section:

[The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.].   

We note that one or more of the authors are employed by a commercial company: LLTech SAS

  1. Please provide an amended Funding Statement declaring this commercial affiliation, as well as a statement regarding the Role of Funders in your study. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. You can update author roles in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form.

Please also include the following statement within your amended Funding Statement.

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If your commercial affiliation did play a role in your study, please state and explain this role within your updated Funding Statement.

2. Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc.  

Within your Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this commercial affiliation does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests) . If this adherence statement is not accurate and  there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include both an updated Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement in your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

5. We note that you have included the phrase “data not shown” in your manuscript. Unfortunately, this does not meet our data sharing requirements. PLOS does not permit references to inaccessible data. We require that authors provide all relevant data within the paper, Supporting Information files, or in an acceptable, public repository. Please add a citation to support this phrase or upload the data that corresponds with these findings to a stable repository (such as Figshare or Dryad) and provide and URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. Or, if the data are not a core part of the research being presented in your study, we ask that you remove the phrase that refers to these data.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This is an interesting publication comparing FF-OCT and conventional histology for the diagnosis of GCA.

The authors convincingly demonstrate that FF_OCT accurately visualizes the main structure of the temporal

artery. The authors show a significant correlation of FF OCT and conventional histology.

I have few points:

- the included TABs were grouped in: niTAB, ihTAB and gcaTAB. In figure 2C/D the authors describe a TAB with

intimal hyperplasia and describe an increased intima thickniss compared to the TAB in figure 2 A/B.

- How was increased intima thickness defined.

- I find the difference in intima thickness between 2 A/B and C/D hard to see.

Furthermore, the authors did select the spot with the most pronounced intima thickness in figure 2 C/D. There were other

parts of the vessel wall, where the initima is much thiner.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript demonstrated the potential of using full field optical coherence tomography for diagnosis of giant cell arteritis. Images of temporal artery biopsy acquired with FF-OCT and images of conventional histology were compared, and the authors demonstrated the possibility of diagnosing GCA from FF-OCT images. The manuscript is well written, conclusions are supported by the results. The sample size in the study is relatively small, however, I understand it's difficult to increase the sample size significantly. The manuscript could also benefit if the authors briefly describe why FF-OCT, instead of other OCT modalities, e.g. SD-OCT, line scanning OCT, were used. Another minor thing is that the authors mentioned z stacks were acquired, but it was not shown in results, and whether acquiring z stacks improves diagnosis accuracy was not discussed.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Aug 31;15(8):e0234165. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234165.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


7 Aug 2020

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

>> The Revised Manuscript was amended to meet PLOS ONE's style requirements according to the provided templates.

2. Please amend your Ethics statement by including approval numbers.

>> The approval numbers were included in the Ethics statement of the Revised Manuscript as follows :

[Patients included in this study participated in two studies involving GCA patients (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158208 and NCT02857192) and gave their oral consent for the use of their temporal arteries for subsequent research in the field of GCA. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board and the Ethics Committee of the Dijon University Hospital.]

3.Thank you for stating the following in the Conflict of interest statement Section of your manuscript:

[All authors have no disclosure and no conflict of interest to declare. This work was supported by grants (MS) from the Fondation ARTHRITIS (2017-2018), the Groupement Interrégional Manuscript Click here to download Manuscript PLOS One Manuscript (Maldiney et al. 2020).docx FF-OCT for the diagnosis of GCA de Recherche Clinique et d’Innovation Est (GIRCI), Appel à Projet Jeunes Chercheurs 2013 and 2014 (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158208 and NCT02857192).]

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement.

Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

[The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.]

>> As suggested, the funding-related text was removed from the Revised Manuscript and included in the cover letter as follows:

[This work was supported by grants from the 'Fondation ARTHRITIS (2017-2018)' and the 'Groupement Interrégional de Recherche Clinique et d’Innovation Est (GIRCI) - Appel à Projet Jeunes Chercheurs' 2013 and 2014 (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158208 and NCT02857192).

The funder did not provide any salary for authors, had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.

LLTech SAS did not play any role as a funding organization for this study. Besides, the commercial affiliation with LLTech SAS does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.]

4.Thank you for stating the following in the Competing Interests section:

[The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.].

We note that one or more of the authors are employed by a commercial company: LLTech SAS

Please provide an amended Funding Statement declaring this commercial affiliation, as well as a statement regarding the Role of Funders in your study. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. You can update author roles in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form.

Please also include the following statement within your amended Funding Statement.

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If your commercial affiliation did play a role in your study, please state and explain this role within your updated Funding Statement.

>> The Funding Statement was updated to describe the role of LLTech SAS in the present study (see requirement 3).

Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc.

Within your Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this commercial affiliation does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests) . If this adherence statement is not accurate and there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include both an updated Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement in your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

>> The Competing Interests Statement was updated to describe the role of LLTech SAS in the present study and included in the cover letter as follows:

[We declare the paid employment of LLTech SAS (E. B.) to provide additional FF-OCT images acquisition and analysis.]

5. We note that you have included the phrase “data not shown” in your manuscript. Unfortunately, this does not meet our data sharing requirements. PLOS does not permit references to inaccessible data. We require that authors provide all relevant data within the paper, Supporting Information files, or in an acceptable, public repository. Please add a citation to support this phrase or upload the data that corresponds with these findings to a stable repository (such as Figshare or Dryad) and provide and URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. Or, if the data are not a core part of the research being presented in your study, we ask that you remove the phrase that refers to these data.

>> The sentence “data not shown” was removed from the Revised Manuscript. The following citation was added to support the sentence that refers to these data (l. 254-256):

[Gould PV, Saikali S. A Comparison of Digitized Frozen Section and Smear Preparations for Intraoperative Neurotelepathology. Anal Cell Pathol. 2012;35: 85–91. doi:10.1155/2012/454631].

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1:This is an interesting publication comparing FF-OCT and conventional histology for the diagnosis of GCA. The authors convincingly demonstrate that FF-OCT accurately visualizes the main structure of the temporal artery. The authors show a significant correlation of FF OCT and conventional histology.

I have few points:

- the included TABs were grouped in: niTAB, ihTAB and gcaTAB. In figure 2C/D the authors describe a TAB with intimal hyperplasia and describe an increased intima thickness compared to the TAB in figure 2 A/B. How was increased intima thickness defined ?

>> The Revised Manuscript was modified in order to define the increased intima as follows (implemented in the "Histological TAB selection" subsection of "Materials and Methods" (l. 157-159):

[In these control samples, the pathologist studied the qualitative aspect of the temporal artery wall to distinguish between negative TAB with normal intima (thinner than media, referred to as niTAB.1 to 9, n = 9) and negative TAB with intimal hyperplasia (thicker than media, referred to as ihTAB.1 to 3, n = 3)].

- I find the difference in intima thickness between 2 A/B and C/D hard to see. Furthermore, the authors did select the spot with the most pronounced intima thickness in figure 2 C/D. There were other parts of the vessel wall, where the intima is much thinner.

>> We agree with the reviewer but we deliberately chose to highlight the most pronounced intima thickness in figure 2 C/D in order to better illustrate the difference between negative TAB with normal intima (i.e. thinner than media) and negative TAB with intimal hyperplasia. However, quantitative analysis and subsequent correlations took into account the other parts of the vessel wall - notably those for which intima was much thinner - as FF-OCT or scanned glass slides image-based tunica thickness were calculated as the mean of three representative measurements throughout each TAB section.

Reviewer #2:The manuscript demonstrated the potential of using full field optical coherence tomography for diagnosis of giant cell arteritis. Images of temporal artery biopsy acquired with FF-OCT and images of conventional histology were compared, and the authors demonstrated the possibility of diagnosing GCA from FF-OCT images. The manuscript is well written, conclusions are supported by the results. The sample size in the study is relatively small, however, I understand it's difficult to increase the sample size significantly.

The manuscript could also benefit if the authors briefly describe why FF-OCT, instead of other OCT modalities, e.g. SD-OCT, line scanning OCT, were used.

>> As suggested by the reviewer, the "Introduction" section of the Revised Manuscript was amended in order to briefly described the main advantages of FF-OCT when compared to other modalities. The following sentence, with additional reference, was implemented as follows (l. 126-129):

[When compared to other modalities such as conventional OCT or even confocal microscopy, FF-OCT was demonstrated to significantly improve spatial resolution by a factor varying from five to ten depending on the acquisition axis [21].].

Another minor thing is that the authors mentioned z stacks were acquired, but it was not shown in results, and whether acquiring z stacks improves diagnosis accuracy was not discussed.

>> The reviewer raises an important detail regarding the axial reconstruction of FF-OCT images and a precision was added at the end of the "FF-OCT imaging" subsection of "Materials and Methods" (l. 173-175):

[A series of FF-OCT slices with 1.5 µm spacing were recorded in depth, and ImageJ 1.52o software was used for axial reconstruction of TAB FF-OCT imaging following z-stacking of a minimum of 20 images.]

In addition, the improvement of diagnosis accuracy through z-stacking is discussed in the last part of the "Discussion" section as follows (l. 299-306):

[Moreover, FF-OCT-based image analysis allows z-stacking of a varying number of slices up to a cumulative length approaching 200 µm, highly dependent on the overall quality and sharpness of the initial TAB axial section, that may potentially improve diagnosis accuracy by unveiling skip lesions. Such hypothesis would require additional experiments with a dedicated reproducible sampling technique allowing concomitant and iterative acquisition of the same slice with both FF-OCT and conventional histology throughout the whole length TAB section. Unfortunately, such experimental conditions remains to be found.]

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Stephan Meckel

14 Aug 2020

Full-field optical coherence tomography for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis

PONE-D-20-14732R1

Dear Dr. Maldiney,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Stephan Meckel, MD, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The authors addressed all review comments effectively. I don't have further questions and believe the manuscript is ready for acceptance.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Stephan Meckel

18 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-14732R1

Full-field optical coherence tomography for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis

Dear Dr. Maldiney:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Dr. Stephan Meckel

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Qualitative imaging of healthy TAB specimens with thin intima layer (n = 9).

    Comparison of FF-OCT (A, C, E, G, I, K, M, O, Q) and conventional histology (B, D, F, H, J, L, N, P, R) imaging. A and B correspond to niTAB1, C and D to niTAB2, E and F to niTAB3, G and H to niTAB4, I and J to niTAB5, K and L to niTAB5, M and N to niTAB7, O and P to niTAB8, Q and R to niTAB9.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Qualitative imaging of healthy TAB specimens with significant intimal hyperplasia (n = 3).

    Comparison of FF-OCT (A, C, E) and conventional histology (B, D, F) imaging. A and B correspond to the ihTAB1, C and D to ihTAB2, E and F to ihTAB3.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Qualitative imaging of GCA TAB specimens (n = 4).

    Comparison of FF-OCT (A, C, E, G) and conventional histology (B, D, F, H) imaging. A and B correspond to gcaTAB1, C and D to gcaTAB2, E and F to gcaTAB3, G and H to gcaTAB4.

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES