Design and Analysis of Optical Sensor for Detection
of Cancer Biomarkers
Harshada J. Patil Raksha D S,
Dept. of ECE Dept. of ECE
Vemana Institute of Technology Canara Engineering College,
V.T.U, India V.T.U, India
jharshadap@gmail.com rakshaderkaje99@gmail.com
Ashwini V R, Indumathi T S
Dept. of ECE, Dept. of DECS
Canara Engineering college, VIAT, V.T. U, India
V.T. U, India indumathi_ts@yahoo.co.in
ashwini.vr.in@ieee.org
Abstract- The proposed paper incorporates the modeling and
simulation of the highly sensitive photonic crystal-based sensor for
breast and cervical cancer infected cell detection. Two structures,
regular hexagon, and 180° phase mismatched hexagon are used.
For the detection of cancer infected cells, the change in refractive
index is considered as the basis and corresponding change in
properties of light rays is observed. A comparative study has been
done for the sensitivity of the designed sensor. The results are
observed with the wavelength shift in the transmitted spectrum.
The sensitivity is calculated for both the structures and found that
180° phase mismatch is better than hexagonal shape as regards to
cervical cancer detection, hexagonal structure fares better than
1800 phase mismatch for breast cancer detection with regards to
performance in sensitivity.
Index Terms - Refractive index, OptiFDTD, Sensitivity.
I. INTRODUCTION
According to WHO every 1 out of 6th death is due to cancer.
In India, more than 1300 people die due to cancer in a day.
Blood cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer, etc.
are the various types of cancer. This paper mainly deals with
breast and cervical cancer. “Breast cancer is a type of cancer in
which the cells of breast start growing out of control, beginning
with ducts or lobules its can also spread out through vasculature
and lymph vessels, if not diagnosed initially” [1] Cervical
cancer occurs in cells of the lower uterus, growing
uncontrollably.
So, the reason for the mass destruction of human life due to
cancer is due to failure in recognition of the disease in an early
stage. Therefore, the world needs an easy and reliable
recognition system of cancer. This paper deals with the
identification of breast cancer and cervical cancer using optics.
It’s a simple technique of comparing the refractive index (RI)
of normal cell and cancer affected cells based on the RI profile.
The constituents of cells are plasma membrane(lipid),
cytoplasm (protein & water), and nucleus. Each of them has
different RI values. For a cell to be “normal cell” all these
constituents should be optimum whereas an increase in protein
content leads to carcinogen cells. [3] The difference in RI
values is noted and this technique is used to detect the cancer
cells.
II. SURVEY OF METHODS AND TOPOLOGIES
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on September 27,2020 at 18:25:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Rohit Dattatraya Hegde
Dept. of ECE
Canara Engineering College, V.T. U, India
hdrohithd@gmail.com
Preeta Sharan
Dept. of ECE
The Oxford College of Engineering,
V.T. U, India
sharanpreeta@gmail.com
There is standard test for breast cancer like mammography
and for cervical cancer pep smear test. However, both these
tests will require trained staff, costly equipment. The proposed
photonic crystal sensor can be benchmarked with respect to cost
and testing procedures because of low cost of production when
produces in bulk. Also, this sensor can be fitted to a handheld
so will minimize the cost of maintenance of a bulky system
used for mammography. The essence of working of the
proposed sensor is similar to the ionic lattice effect on electrons
in solid. In the same way, the periodic optical nanostructure, the
photonic crystal affects the photon movement. Electromagnetic
propagation is affected by a photonic crystal which creates the
bandgap in the layers of periodic dielectric nanostructures.
They have high perspectives ranging from gas sensors, optical
filters, inkless painting, reflective flat display, and photonic
papers, etc. The study of cells in submicron resolution provides
the ways to RI values of cells. The RI values of normal as well
as cancer cell will be predetermined and is used as a benchmark
for further comparison. The cells that have been used for the
study of cancer affected cell and normal cell condition has the
RI as shown in the below table.
TABLE. I
Refractive indices used for simulation
Sl. No Type of cancer Type of cell RI value
1 Breast cancer Normal cell 1.385
Cancer cell 1.3999
2 Cervical cancer Normal cell 1.368
Cancer cell 1.392
Table I, shows RI values for cancerous and non-cancerous cells
(biomarker). From literature survey we found that for cancerous
and non-cancerous cell there is a different RI [2]. After
determining the RI value, the crystal structure is designed using
software called OptiFDTD-15.0.1. A two random structure is
selected to showcase the refraction of the light rays with
preferred RI. The structures are Hexagonal shape and the
180° phase mismatched hexagon structure. The RI values of
normal as well as cancer cell will be predetermined and is used
as a benchmark for further comparison.
 III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION normal and cancerous cell.

A. Hexagonal shape for breast cancer

It consists of the PBG crystals which are arranged on a wafer

dimension of length and width 30um respectively. The material
is analysed for both the RI of cancer and normal cells of breast
cancer. In this crystal lattice hexagonal structure is constructed
as shown in the figure. This structure has one input and output.
The left side of the structure is pointed input whereas the right
side of the structure is assigned with an output observation point
and observation line. The observation area will be assigned
where the output needs to be obtained.[9]

Fig.4 Relative power of normal cell vs cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)

The green curvature represents the relative power vs distance

of cancer cells whereas the red curvature represents relative
power vs distance of normal cell. The amplitude variation can
be observed between normal and cancer cells which helps in
easy identification of cancer affected cells. The peak value of
the normal cell graph corresponds to the value of 12.31 and
that of a cancer cell is 17.84. So, this makes the clear
difference between normal and cancer cells.
2) Numerical analysis:
Sensitivity is the ratio of change in wavelength shift to the
change in RI as given in Eq. 1.

. .
Sensitivity = = = 2.0134 [1]
Fig.1 Hexagonal model for breast cancer (all dimensions in um) . .

1) Observation: is the wavelength of light from source for cancerous cell

is the wavelength of light from source for normal cell
is the RI of cancerous cell
is the RI of normal cell

B. 180° phase mismatched hexagon for breast cancer:

180° phase mismatch is designed such that one of the arms is
longer than the other one. Here coupling of light to output side
cannot be done and all the light rays are reflected towards input
port.

Fig.2 Movement of light rays for normal cell (all dimensions in um)

Fig.3 Movement of light rays for cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)

The above Fig 2 and Fig 3 shows the simulation results for both Fig.5 The 180° phase mismatched hexagon model for breast cancer (all
normal and cancerous cells.it symbolizes the stress value dimensions in um)
associated with the cell. From Fig 2 and 3 we can conclude that
there is a maximum stress value at the right end of the structure.
The maximum stress value for cancerous cell is 0.07 and for
normal cell is 0.633. Hence easily we can differentiate between

Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on September 27,2020 at 18:25:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1) Observation: easy identification of cancer affected cells. The peak value of
the normal cell graph corresponds to the value of 1.69 and that
of a cancer cell is 13.24. So, this makes the clear difference
between normal and cancer cells.

2) Numerical calculation:
. .
Sensitivity = = = 0.6711 [2]
. .

C. Hexagonal shape for cervical cancer:

The construction and working of the structure are the same as those
mentioned before for breast cancer but the only difference is the RI
value for cervical cancer is different. The different values of RI values
are applied concerning cervical cancer and simulated. The simulation
looks as follows:

Fig.6 Movement of light rays for normal cell (all dimensions in um)

Fig.9 Movement of light rays for normal cell (all dimensions in um)

Fig.7 Movement of light rays for cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)

The above diagram shows the simulation results for both

normal and cancerous cells using optiFDTD software. This
provides the stress value associated with the cell. For a
cancerous cell it is observed that stress values of the cell are
high, that increases diffraction as obtained in Fig. 7. “Stress
values increase with light propagation direction”. There is an
overall change in the RI of cancerous cells known as
ineffective. Fig. 6 explains the variation of RI with stress value
non-cancerous cell. Due to the diffraction of light when
subjected to cell depends on the stress of particular cell. The Fig.10 Movement of light rays for cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)
cancerous cell has more stress value when compared with the
1) Observation
normal cell. Hence this analysis can be used to detect the
cancerous and non-cancerous cells.

Fig.8 relative power of normal cell vs cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)
The green curvature represents the relative power vs distance
of cancer cells whereas the red curvature represents relative
power vs distance of normal cell. The amplitude variation can
be observed between normal and cancer cells which helps in
Fig.11 relative power of normal cell vs cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)
The green curvature represents the relative power vs distance
of cancer cells whereas the red curvature represents relative
power vs distance of normal cell. The amplitude variation can
be observed between normal and cancer cells which helps in
easy identification of cancer affected cells. The peak value of
the normal cell graph corresponds to the value of 12.47 and that

Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on September 27,2020 at 18:25:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
of a cancer cell is 8.69. So, this makes a clear difference
between normal and cancer cells.
2) Numerical analysis:
. .
Sensitivity = = = 1.25
. .
D. 180° phase mismatch for cervical cancer:
The structure of a 180° phase mismatch for cervical cancer is
similar to that of breast cancer. Here the major difference is the
RI which is 1.392 for cervical cancer.
Fig.12 180° phase mismatched hexagon model for cervical cancer (all
dimensions in um)
Fig.13 Movement of light rays for normal cell (all dimensions in um)
Fig.14 Movement of light rays for cancerous cell (all dimensions in um
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on September 27,2020 at 18:25:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1) Observation
[3]
Fig.15 relative power of normal cell vs cancerous cell (all dimensions in um)
In the above graph, the green curvature represents the cancer
cell whereas red indicates normal cell. By observing the graph,
we can conclude that the wavelength shift is high in this
structure. Henceforth the structure is most sensitive for the
detection of cervical cancer affected cells against normal cells.
2) Numerical analysis:
. .
Sensitivity = = = 4.166 [4]
. .
IV CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
The idea proposed here is majorly about determining the cancerous
cell using photonics. The observation made here is that the sensitivity
of cells has changed drastically. Additionally, by applying this
technique, it can be easily distinguishable between the normal and
cancer cell condition. Here in this work sensitivity is used to measure
the efficiency of the detection. If the sensitivity is more than the
efficiency of detecting the cancerous cell is more. The minimum or
maximum value of sensitivity is not a benchmark. The sensitivity is
used only to know how efficient the detection is. There is no need for
benchmarking the minimum value of sensitivity. In this paper, the
comparative study has been done for the sensitivity by considering
hexagonal and 180° phase miss-match. After sensitivity calculation it
is observed that for cervical cancer detection 180° phase mismatch is
better as its sensitivity is 4166nm/RIU compared to a hexagonal shape
having sensitivity of 1250nm/RIU. On the contrary, for breast cancer,
hexagonal structure is better with its sensitivity is 2013nm/RIU
compared with the 180° phase mis-match having sensitivity of
671nm/RIU. The designed structure has high sensitivity value hence
can be profoundly used to separate cancerous and normal cells. If there
is a need of minimum value of sensitivity required using the proposed
technique to differentiate between normal and cancerous cells then
671nm/RIU can be taken as the basis. The future scope of extending
this work includes testing using more samples with different age group
and fabrication for a nano scale device.
V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We gratefully acknowledge the data collected by Chien Chung Tsai
and Prof. Sheng Lung Huang in their report on “Water distribution in
cancer and normal cells”. Additionally, we thank R&D lab, Oxford
college, Bengaluru for the support.
VI REFERENCES
[1] Cogliano VJ, Baan R, Straif K, et al. 2011. Preventable exposures
associated with human cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 103:1827–1839.
[2] Morgan, R. A. et al. Cancer regression in patients after transfer of
genetically engineered lymphocytes. Science 314, 126–129 (2006).
[3] Li Q, Jiang Y. Top classic citations in pancreatic cancer
research. 2016;14:298.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1061-8.

[4] World Cancer Report. International Agency for Research on

Cancer; 2008. Retrieved 26 February 2011.

[5] Lee S-G, Choi J-S, Kim J-E and Park H Y 2008 Reflection
minimization at two-dimensional photonic crystal interfaces

[6] J. Tang, R. M. Rangayyan, J. Xu, I. E. Naqa and Y. Yang,

"Computer-Aided Detection and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer with
Mammography: Recent Advances," in IEEE Transactions on
Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 236-251,
March 2009.

[7] P. Guo et al., "Nuclei-Based Features for Uterine Cervical Cancer

Histology Image Analysis With Fusion-Based Classification," in IEEE
Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1595-
1607, Nov. 2016.

[8] Y. Song et al., "Accurate Cervical Cell Segmentation from

Overlapping Clumps in Pap Smear Images," in IEEE Transactions on
Medical Imaging, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 288-300, Jan. 2017.

[9] K. Tumer, N. Ramanujam, J. Ghosh and R. Richards-Kortum,

"Ensembles of radial basis function networks for spectroscopic
detection of cervical precancer," in IEEE Transactions on Biomedical
Engineering, vol. 45, no. 8, pp. 953-961

[10] El Ghissassi F, Baan R, Straif K, et al. A review of human

carcinogens— Part D: radiation. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(8):751–752.

[11] Secretan B, Straif K, Baan R, et al. A review of human

carcinogens—Part E: tobacco, areca nut, alcohol, coal smoke, and
salted fish. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(11):1033–1034.

[12] Baan R, Grosse Y, Straif K, et al. A review of human

carcinogens—Part F: chemical agents and related occupations. Lancet
Oncol. 2009;10(12): 1143–1144.

[13] Cervical cancer. (2018, September 12). Retrieved from

https://www.who.int/cancer/prevention/diagnosis-screening/cervical-
cancer/en/

[14] Crosignani P. The IARC monographs: a resource for precaution

and prevention? The new Preamble does not fit. Occup Environ Med.
2008; 65(7):500.

[15] Ge, D., Shi, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, L., & Yang, P. (2019, February
11). Numerical simulation of a novel bilayer photonic crystal slab
biosensor with hexagonal lattice

[16] M. El Beheiry, V. Liu, S. Fan, and O. Levi, "Sensitivity

enhancement in photonic crystal slab biosensors," Opt. Express 18,
22702-22714 (2010).

Authorized licensed use limited to: Cornell University Library. Downloaded on September 27,2020 at 18:25:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.