Literature DB >> 16567974

Quantitative assessment of tumour extraction from dermoscopy images and evaluation of computer-based extraction methods for an automatic melanoma diagnostic system.

Hitoshi Iyatomi1, Hiroshi Oka, Masataka Saito, Ayako Miyake, Masayuki Kimoto, Jun Yamagami, Seiichiro Kobayashi, Akiko Tanikawa, Masafumi Hagiwara, Koichi Ogawa, Giuseppe Argenziano, H Peter Soyer, Masaru Tanaka.   

Abstract

The aims of this study were to provide a quantitative assessment of the tumour area extracted by dermatologists and to evaluate computer-based methods from dermoscopy images for refining a computer-based melanoma diagnostic system. Dermoscopic images of 188 Clark naevi, 56 Reed naevi and 75 melanomas were examined. Five dermatologists manually drew the border of each lesion with a tablet computer. The inter-observer variability was evaluated and the standard tumour area (STA) for each dermoscopy image was defined. Manual extractions by 10 non-medical individuals and by two computer-based methods were evaluated with STA-based assessment criteria: precision and recall. Our new computer-based method introduced the region-growing approach in order to yield results close to those obtained by dermatologists. The effectiveness of our extraction method with regard to diagnostic accuracy was evaluated. Two linear classifiers were built using the results of conventional and new computer-based tumour area extraction methods. The final diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by drawing the receiver operating curve (ROC) of each classifier, and the area under each ROC was evaluated. The standard deviations of the tumour area extracted by five dermatologists and 10 non-medical individuals were 8.9% and 10.7%, respectively. After assessment of the extraction results by dermatologists, the STA was defined as the area that was selected by more than two dermatologists. Dermatologists selected the melanoma area with statistically smaller divergence than that of Clark naevus or Reed naevus (P = 0.05). By contrast, non-medical individuals did not show this difference. Our new computer-based extraction algorithm showed superior performance (precision, 94.1%; recall, 95.3%) to the conventional thresholding method (precision, 99.5%; recall, 87.6%). These results indicate that our new algorithm extracted a tumour area close to that obtained by dermatologists and, in particular, the border part of the tumour was adequately extracted. With this refinement, the area under the ROC increased from 0.795 to 0.875 and the diagnostic accuracy showed an increase of approximately 20% in specificity when the sensitivity was 80%. It can be concluded that our computer-based tumour extraction algorithm extracted almost the same area as that obtained by dermatologists and provided improved computer-based diagnostic accuracy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16567974     DOI: 10.1097/01.cmr.0000215041.76553.58

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Melanoma Res        ISSN: 0960-8931            Impact factor:   3.599


  15 in total

1.  A methodological approach to the classification of dermoscopy images.

Authors:  M Emre Celebi; Hassan A Kingravi; Bakhtiyar Uddin; Hitoshi Iyatomi; Y Alp Aslandogan; William V Stoecker; Randy H Moss
Journal:  Comput Med Imaging Graph       Date:  2007-03-26       Impact factor: 4.790

2.  Unsupervised border detection in dermoscopy images.

Authors:  M Emre Celebi; Y Alp Aslandogan; William V Stoecker; Hitoshi Iyatomi; Hiroshi Oka; Xiaohe Chen
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.365

3.  Artificial Intelligence Based Skin Classification Using GMM.

Authors:  M Monisha; A Suresh; M R Rashmi
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 4.  Emerging imaging technologies in dermatology: Part II: Applications and limitations.

Authors:  Samantha L Schneider; Indermeet Kohli; Iltefat H Hamzavi; M Laurin Council; Anthony M Rossi; David M Ozog
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 11.527

5.  Automatic lesion border selection in dermoscopy images using morphology and color features.

Authors:  Nabin K Mishra; Ravneet Kaur; Reda Kasmi; Jason R Hagerty; Robert LeAnder; Ronald J Stanley; Randy H Moss; William V Stoecker
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 2.365

6.  An improved objective evaluation measure for border detection in dermoscopy images.

Authors:  M Emre Celebi; Gerald Schaefer; Hitoshi Iyatomi; William V Stoecker; Joseph M Malters; James M Grichnik
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.365

7.  A soft kinetic data structure for lesion border detection.

Authors:  Sinan Kockara; Mutlu Mete; Vincent Yip; Brendan Lee; Kemal Aydin
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  Approximate lesion localization in dermoscopy images.

Authors:  M Emre Celebi; Hitoshi Iyatomi; Gerald Schaefer; William V Stoecker
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.365

Review 9.  Lesion border detection in dermoscopy images.

Authors:  M Emre Celebi; Hitoshi Iyatomi; Gerald Schaefer; William V Stoecker
Journal:  Comput Med Imaging Graph       Date:  2009-01-03       Impact factor: 4.790

10.  Border detection in dermoscopy images using statistical region merging.

Authors:  M Emre Celebi; Hassan A Kingravi; Hitoshi Iyatomi; Y Alp Aslandogan; William V Stoecker; Randy H Moss; Joseph M Malters; James M Grichnik; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Harold S Rabinovitz; Scott W Menzies
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.365

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.