Fluorescence molecular endoscopy (FME) is emerging as a "red-flag" technique with potential to deliver earlier, faster, and more personalized detection of disease in the gastrointestinal tract, including cancer, and to gain insights into novel drug distribution, dose finding, and response prediction. However, to date, the performance of FME systems is assessed mainly by endoscopists during a procedure, leading to arbitrary, potentially biased, and heavily subjective assessment. This approach significantly affects the repeatability of the procedures and the interpretation or comparison of the acquired data, representing a major bottleneck towards the clinical translation of the technology. Herein, we propose a robust methodology for FME performance assessment and quality control that is based on a novel multi-parametric rigid standard. This standard enables the characterization of an FME system's sensitivity through a single acquisition, performance comparison of multiple systems, and, for the first time, quality control of a system as a function of time and number of usages. We show the photostability of the standard experimentally and demonstrate how it can be used to characterize the performance of an FME system. Moreover, we showcase how the standard can be employed for quality control of a system. In this study, we find that the use of composite fluorescence standards before endoscopic procedures can ensure that an FME system meets the performance criteria and that components prone to performance degradation are replaced in time, avoiding disruption of clinical endoscopy logistics. This will help overcome a major barrier for the translation of FME into the clinics.      «

Fluorescence molecular endoscopy (FME) is emerging as a "red-flag" technique with potential to deliver earlier, faster, and more personalized detection of disease in the gastrointestinal tract, including cancer, and to gain insights into novel drug distribution, dose finding, and response prediction. However, to date, the performance of FME systems is assessed mainly by endoscopists during a procedure, leading to arbitrary, potentially biased, and heavily subjective assessment. This approach sig...     »