| Literature DB >> 32329265 |
Ahmad Salman1, Itshak Lapidot2, Elad Shufan1, Adam H Agbaria3, Bat-Sheva Porat Katz4,5, Shaul Mordechai3.
Abstract
SIGNIFICANCE: Accurate and objective identification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is of major clinical importance due to the current lack of low-cost and noninvasive diagnostic tools to differentiate between the two. Developing an approach for such identification can have a great impact in the field of dementia diseases as it would offer physicians a routine objective test to support their diagnoses. The problem is especially acute because these two dementias have some common symptoms and characteristics, which can lead to misdiagnosis of DLB as AD and vice versa, mainly at their early stages. AIM: The aim is to evaluate the potential of mid-infrared (IR) spectroscopy in tandem with machine learning algorithms as a sensitive method to detect minor changes in the biochemical structures that accompany the development of AD and DLB based on a simple peripheral blood test, thus improving the diagnostic accuracy of differentiation between DLB and AD. APPROACH: IR microspectroscopy was used to examine white blood cells and plasma isolated from 56 individuals: 26 controls, 20 AD patients, and 10 DLB patients. The measured spectra were analyzed via machine learning.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; WBC; dementia with Lewy bodies; infrared spectroscopy; machine learning; plasma
Year: 2020 PMID: 32329265 PMCID: PMC7177186 DOI: 10.1117/1.JBO.25.4.046501
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomed Opt ISSN: 1083-3668 Impact factor: 3.170
The number of patients and number of spectra for each investigated category.
| Sample type | Controls | AD | DLB | Dementia (AD and DLB) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of patients | No. of spectra | No. of patients | No. of spectra | No. of patients | No. of spectra | No. of patients | No. of spectra | |
| WBC | 26 | 145 | 20 | 121 | 10 | 59 | 30 | 180 |
| Plasma | 23 | 111 | 18 | 87 | 8 | 39 | 26 | 126 |
Fig. 1Schematic description of the training and testing process, including the different classifiers, feature selection, and hyper-parameters tuning.
Fig. 2AUC scores in percentage versus the number of selected features of the second derivative spectra of WBC in the 900- to region for the SVM classifier for the classification between dementia and controls.
Fig. 3WBC IR second derivative average spectra of DLB, AD, and controls in the 900- region. The highlighted areas represent the standard deviation of the spectra within each category.
Assignments of the functional groups in the IR spectra.
| Wavenumber ( | Molecular vibrations of the functional groups and biomolecule contributor |
|---|---|
| 1741 | Phospholipids are the main contributors |
| 1590 to 1727 | Amide I absorption bands (mainly proteins) |
| 1480 to 1590 | Amide II absorption bands (mainly proteins) |
| 1395 | Proteins, lipids, and amino acids are the main contributors |
| 1200 to 1340 | Amide III (mainly proteins) |
| 1185 to 1485 | Contributed mainly by phosphate, proteins, nucleic acids, and lipids |
| 950 to 1185 | Carbohydrates are the main contributors |
Fig. 4Plasma IR second derivative average spectra of DLB, AD, and controls in the 900- region. The highlighted areas represent the standard deviations of the spectra within each category.
Fig. 5Resulting ROC curves of the different classifiers for the classification between dementia and controls categories using selected features from the FTIR second derivative spectra, in the 900- region, for the two blood components: (a) WBC and (b) plasma. The curves scores were derived at the spectrum level using the LOGOCV approach for both classifiers.
Performances of the best-used-classifier for the classification between dementia and controls categories. The classification results were computed at the patient level by voting the results of the classifier at the spectrum level, derived using the LOGOCV approach, for all of the feature vectors that belong to the specific patient.
| Best classifier | No. of features | SE | SP | Acc | PPV | NPV | AUC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WBC | RF | 300 | 0.90 | 0.81 | 0.86 | 0.84 | 0.88 | 0.90 |
| Plasma | RF | 300 | 0.81 | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.82 | 0.79 | 0.83 |
Fig. 6Resulting ROC curves for the different classifiers for the classification between AD and DLB categories using selected features from FTIR second derivative spectra, in the 900- region, for the two blood components: (a) WBC and (b) plasma. The curves scores were derived at the spectrum level using the LOGOCV approach for both classifiers.
Performances of the best used classifier for the classification between AD and DLB categories. The classification results were computed at the patient level by voting the results of the classifier at the spectrum level, derived using the LOGOCV approach, for all of the feature vectors that belong to the specific patient.
| Best classifier | No. of features | SE | SP | Acc | PPV | NPV | AUC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WBC | SVM third poly | 310 | 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.80 | 0.91 |
| Plasma | RF | 300 | 0.83 | 0.75 | 0.81 | 0.91 | 0.60 | 0.84 |
Performances of the SVM classifier in percentage for the classification between the different couples of categories, controls, DLB, and the three stages of AD, mild moderate, and severe. The classification results were computed based on the WBC data at the patient level by voting the results of the classifier at the spectrum level, derived using the LOGOCV approach, for all of the feature vectors that belong to the specific patient.
| Category pairing | AUC | ACC | SE | SP | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DLB-AD moderate | 0.81 | 0.87 | 0.75 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.96 |
| DLB-AD mild | 0.91 | 0.97 | 0.75 | 1 | 1 | 0.96 |
| DLB-AD severe | 0.92 | 0.91 | 1 | 0.8 | 0.86 | 1 |
| DLB-AD combined mild and moderate | 0.94 | 0.83 | 0.88 | 0.8 | 0.78 | 0.89 |
| Controls-AD mild | 0.75 | 0.86 | 0.75 | 0.81 | 0.38 | 0.95 |
| Controls-AD moderate | 0.9 | 0.87 | 0.75 | 0.88 | 0.5 | 0.96 |
| Controls-AD severe | 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.92 | 1 | 1.0 | 0.96 |
| DLB-AD combined mild and moderate | 0.88 | 0.85 | 0.87 | 0.8 | 0.67 | 0.92 |
The number of patients included in the analysis is as follows: 26 controls, 10 DLB patients, 4 AD moderate, 4 AD mild, and 12 AD severe.