| Literature DB >> 24955419 |
Yessi Jusman1, Siew Cheok Ng1, Noor Azuan Abu Osman1.
Abstract
Advent of medical image digitalization leads to image processing and computer-aided diagnosis systems in numerous clinical applications. These technologies could be used to automatically diagnose patient or serve as second opinion to pathologists. This paper briefly reviews cervical screening techniques, advantages, and disadvantages. The digital data of the screening techniques are used as data for the computer screening system as replaced in the expert analysis. Four stages of the computer system are enhancement, features extraction, feature selection, and classification reviewed in detail. The computer system based on cytology data and electromagnetic spectra data achieved better accuracy than other data.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24955419 PMCID: PMC4037632 DOI: 10.1155/2014/810368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1Taxonomy of cervical cancer screening.
Comparison of the ability of the manual cervical screening methods.
| Highlighted features | Cellular level | Tissue level | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pap smear | LBC | HPV-DNA | EMS | VILI/VIA | Cervicography | Colposcopy | HSDI | |
| Low cost | V* | V* | V | V* | V | V | V* | V* |
| Short time | X | X | X | X | V | V | V | V |
| Not Subjective | X | X | V | V | X | X | X | X |
| Possible in real time | V | V | X | V | X | V | V | V |
Figure 2Comparison of analysis screening system by human expert and machine.
Figure 3Intelligent cervical cancer classification systems.
Information about cervical screening instruments.
| Information | PAPNET | AutoPap 300 | FocalPoint | TIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input data | Pap smear only | Pap smear only | Pap smear and ThinPrep | ThinPrep only |
| Characteristic | Semiautomatic system | Automatic system | Automatic system | Automatic system |
| USFDA | Secondary screening | Primary screening | Primary screening | Primary screening |
Figure 4Cervical data used for intelligent classification. Celluler-level features; (a) cytology image, (b) FISH image, and (c) optical spectra. Tissue-level features; (d) cervicography, (e) colposcopy, and (f) optical image (HSDI).
The list of features that are extracted by different data.
| Cellular-level based features | Tissue-level based features | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cytology | FISH | Electromagnetic spectra | Cervicography | Colposcopy | HSDI image | |
| Size | (i) Area of Cell [ | (i) Area for each coloured spot [ | Shift of peak frequency [ | Perimeter of anatomical features [ | Perimeter of anatomical features [ | Perimeter of acetowhite [ |
|
| ||||||
| Shape | (i) Circularity of cytoplasm [ | Circularity of each coloured spot [ | (i) Circularity of cervix [ | |||
|
| ||||||
| Ratio | (i) Percentage of cell coverage [ | (i) Ratio of peak intensities [ | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Topology | (i) Distribution of cell [ | (i) Distances between the same color spots [ | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Texture | (i) Multinucleus cells [ | Acetowhite region [ | Acetowhite region [ | |||
|
| ||||||
| Color intensity | (i) Cell [ | Intensity of each coloured spot [ | Anatomical features | Anatomical features [ | ||
The list of classifiers that are used by different studies.
| Cellular-level based features | Tissue-level based features | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cytology | FISH | Electromagnetic spectra | Cervicography | Colposcopy | HSDI image | |
| Artificial Neural network | (3/1241/10/78.7) [ | (2/361/13/74.4) [ | (2/283/7/95.8) [ | |||
|
| ||||||
| Support vector machine | (3/63/10/72) [ | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Logistic regression | (4/145/—/88) [ | |||||
|
| ||||||
|
| (2/283/7/68.9) [ | (7/371/5/95.96) [ | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Linear discriminant analysis | (5/230/15/60.4) [ | (2/324/—/78) [ | (2/100/—/78.5) [ | (2/40/4/87.2) [ | ||
|
| ||||||
| Decision trees | (3/1241/10/77) [ | (2/325/—/93.6) [ | (2/211/—/78) [ | (2/29/—/86) [ | ||
The values given in bracket are number of classes/number of data/number of features used/accuracy.
Figure 5Performances of six classifiers generally for cervical precancerous data.