| Literature DB >> 21698027 |
Suneetha Devpura, Bensachee Pattamadilok, Zain U Syed, Pranita Vemulapalli, Marsha Henderson, Steven J Rehse, Iltefat Hamzavi, Henry W Lim, Ratna Naik.
Abstract
Quantification of skin changes due to acanthosis nigricans (AN), a disorder common among insulin-resistant diabetic and obese individuals, was investigated using two optical techniques: diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) and colorimetry. Measurements were obtained from AN lesions on the neck and two control sites of eight AN patients. A principal component/discriminant function analysis successfully differentiated between AN lesion and normal skin with 87.7% sensitivity and 94.8% specificity in DRS measurements and 97.2% sensitivity and 96.4% specificity in colorimetry measurements.Entities:
Keywords: (170.1580) Chemometrics; (170.1610) Clinical applications; (170.1870) Dermatology; (170.3890) Medical optics instrumentation; (170.4580) Optical diagnostics for medicine; (170.6510) Spectroscopy, tissue diagnostics
Year: 2011 PMID: 21698027 PMCID: PMC3114232 DOI: 10.1364/BOE.2.001664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Opt Express ISSN: 2156-7085 Impact factor: 3.732
Fig. 1Left (top to bottom): DRS setup with laptop, spectrophotometer, halogen light source, calibration plate and bifurcated fiber optic cable; close-up of DRS probe showing 2 mm fiber optic core; DRS probe applied to patient’s posterior neck; Right (top to bottom): colorimeter; close-up of colorimeter 8 mm aperture; colorimeter measuring patient’s posterior neck.
Fig. 2Mean absorbance spectra of forearm control, neck control, and lesion. Lesion tissue demonstrates significantly greater absorption/weaker scattering.
Fig. 3Discriminant function plots for (a) DRS and (b) colorimetry data obtained from all patients over the course of this study.
Truth tables for leave-one-out classification results of DRS and colorimetry.
| DRS (%) | Colorimetry (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| True | False | True | False | |||
| Positive | 91.4 | 4.9 | Positive | 98.4 | 3.9 | |
| Negative | 95.1 | 8.6 | Negative | 96.1 | 1.6 | |
Truth tables for patient exclusion classification results of DRS and colorimetry.
| DRS (%) | Colorimetry (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| True | False | True | False | |||
| Positive | 87.7 | 5.2 | Positive | 97.2 | 5.4 | |
| Negative | 94.8 | 12.3 | Negative | 94.6 | 2.8 | |
Fig. 4DF plots showing (a) DRS and (b) colorimetry data with patient 8’s lesion data input as unclassified data into the analysis. This patient’s lesion data, which clustered well with itself, was significantly different from the mean of the other patients’ lesion data. Nonetheless, it was easily and reliably classified as “lesion” in both analyses.
Fig. 5ROC curves of a test to differentiate neck control measurements from lesion measurements (as shown in Fig. 3) on the basis of the DF1 score alone for (a) DRS and (b) colorimetry data. The area under the curves for (a) was 0.985 and for (b) was 0.995.