Ali Naqvi1, Niti Manglik1,2, Ellen Dudrey1,2, Cynthia Perry1, Zuber D Mulla3, Jorge L Cervantes4. 1. Department of Medical Education, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso, 5001 El Paso Dr, El Paso, TX, 79905, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, TX, USA. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Office of Faculty Development, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA. 4. Department of Medical Education, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso, 5001 El Paso Dr, El Paso, TX, 79905, USA. jorge.cervantes@ttuhsc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer remains a global health problem especially in remote areas of developing countries which have limited resources for cervical cancer screening. In this study, we evaluated the performance of a low-cost, smartphone attachable paper-based microscope when used for classifying images of cervical cytology. METHODS: Cervical cytology samples included: 10 Normal, 10 Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), 10 High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and 10 Malignant Pap Smears. The agreement between conventional microscopy vs. Foldscope imaging was calculated using a weighted kappa coefficient. A confusion matrix was created with three classes: Normal, LSIL, and HSIL/malignant, to evaluate the performance of the Foldscope by calculating the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: We observed a kappa statistic of 0.68 for the agreement. This translates into a substantial agreement between the cytological classifications by the Foldscope vs. conventional microscopy. The accuracy of the Foldscope was 80%, with a sensitivity and specificity of 85 and 90% for the HSIL/Mal category, 80 and 83.3%, for LSIL, and 70 and 96.7% for Normal. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the usefulness of the Foldscope in cervical cytology, demonstrating it has substantial agreement with conventional microscopy. Its use could improve cytologic interpretations in underserved areas and, thus, improve the quality of cervical cancer screening. Improvements in existing limitations of the device, such as ability to focus, could potentially increase its accuracy.
BACKGROUND:Cervical cancer remains a global health problem especially in remote areas of developing countries which have limited resources for cervical cancer screening. In this study, we evaluated the performance of a low-cost, smartphone attachable paper-based microscope when used for classifying images of cervical cytology. METHODS: Cervical cytology samples included: 10 Normal, 10 Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), 10 High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and 10 Malignant Pap Smears. The agreement between conventional microscopy vs. Foldscope imaging was calculated using a weighted kappa coefficient. A confusion matrix was created with three classes: Normal, LSIL, and HSIL/malignant, to evaluate the performance of the Foldscope by calculating the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: We observed a kappa statistic of 0.68 for the agreement. This translates into a substantial agreement between the cytological classifications by the Foldscope vs. conventional microscopy. The accuracy of the Foldscope was 80%, with a sensitivity and specificity of 85 and 90% for the HSIL/Mal category, 80 and 83.3%, for LSIL, and 70 and 96.7% for Normal. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the usefulness of the Foldscope in cervical cytology, demonstrating it has substantial agreement with conventional microscopy. Its use could improve cytologic interpretations in underserved areas and, thus, improve the quality of cervical cancer screening. Improvements in existing limitations of the device, such as ability to focus, could potentially increase its accuracy.
Authors: Dipali P Parmar; Jay S Rathod; Minhaz M Karkhanawala; Pradnya K Bhole; Darshana S Rathod Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 1.848