| Literature DB >> 32815466 |
Zhipeng Fan1,2, Huadong Sun1,2, Cong Ren1,2, Xiaowei Han1,2, Zhijie Zhao1,2.
Abstract
In recent years, the incidence of lung cancer has been increasing. Lung cancer detection is based on computed tomography (CT) imaging of the lung area to determine whether there are pulmonary nodules. And then judge what's good and what's bad. However, due to the traditional way of manual reading and lack of experience and other problems. This leads to visual fatigue and misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis. In order to detect pulmonary nodules early and accurately, a new assistant diagnosis method for pulmonary nodules is proposed. Firstly, the image is preprocessed and denoised by median filter, the lung parenchyma is segmented by random walk algorithm and the region of interest is extracted, and then, according to the continuity of the CT slices, the texture feature extraction method of pulmonary nodules based on volume local direction ternary pattern is used to extract the features. Finally, the pulmonary nodules are identified and classified by the assistant diagnosis model of pulmonary nodules based on Stacking algorithm. In order to illustrate the validity of the diagnosis model, the experiments are carried out by cross-validation of ten folds. Experiments using data from LIDC database show that the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the proposed method are 82.2%, 85.7%, and 78.8%, respectively. Texture Recognition method based on volume vocal direction ternary pattern is feasible for the identification of pulmonary nodules and provides a reference value for doctor-assisted diagnosis.Entities:
Keywords: CAD; Stacking algorithm; random walk; volume local direction ternary pattern
Year: 2020 PMID: 32815466 PMCID: PMC8291834 DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2020.1807125
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioengineered ISSN: 2165-5979 Impact factor: 3.269
Figure 1.Median filtering: (a) original image (b)3 × 3 template (c)5 × 5 template (d)7 × 7 template.
Figure 2.Pulmonary parenchymal segmentation: (a)original image. (b) front and background seed settings (c) front probability calculation (d) binarization (e) segmentation boundary (f) pulmonary parenchymal segmentation.
Figure 3.ROI extraction results: (a) pulmonary nodules (b) suspected nodules.
Figure 4.Texture feature extraction of pulmonary nodules.
Figure 5.Extraction process of volume local ternary patterns.
Figure 6.Two-dimensional planar pattern of central pixel.
Figure 7.Stereo direction pattern of central pixel.
Figure 8.Assistant diagnosis model of pulmonary nodules based on Staking algorithm.
Classifier SVM classification results.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | MCC | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VLDTP, K = 1 | 0.807 | 0.848 | 0.765 | 0.616 | 0.814 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.43 | 0.801 | 0.845 | 0.758 | 0.606 | 0.809 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.675 | 0.800 | 0.852 | 0.748 | 0.604 | 0.810 |
| 3D-GLCM | 0.774 | 0.780 | 0.769 | 0.549 | 0.775 |
Classifier ELM classification results.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | MCC | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VLDTP, K = 1 | 0.761 | 0.836 | 0.686 | 0.528 | 0.777 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.43 | 0.743 | 0.803 | 0.683 | 0.490 | 0.757 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.675 | 0.739 | 0.821 | 0.656 | 0.484 | 0.758 |
| 3D-GLCM | 0.664 | 0.680 | 0.647 | 0.328 | 0.668 |
Figure 9.ROC curve of pulmonary nodules classification results.
Training results of classifiers at different levels.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | MCC | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leve1-SVM | 0.848 | 0.802 | 0.756 | 0.608 | 0.811 |
| Leve1-KNN | 0.738 | 0.763 | 0.787 | 0.527 | 0.757 |
| Leve1-RF | 0.856 | 0.815 | 0.775 | 0.633 | 0.823 |
| Leve1-ELM | 0.830 | 0.748 | 0.673 | 0.502 | 0.765 |
| Leve2-KNN | 0.931 | 0.918 | 0.905 | 0.836 | 0.919 |
Test results of classifiers at different levels.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | MCC | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leve1-SVM | 0.847 | 0.795 | 0.744 | 0.594 | 0.806 |
| Leve1-KNN | 0.702 | 0.731 | 0.760 | 0.463 | 0.723 |
| Leve1-RF | 0.855 | 0.802 | 0.748 | 0.608 | 0.812 |
| Leve1-ELM | 0.828 | 0.743 | 0.656 | 0.494 | 0.764 |
| Leve2-KNN | 0.879 | 0.831 | 0.783 | 0.665 | 0.839 |
Figure 10.Performance comparison of two level learners.
Classifier KNN classification results.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | MCC | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VLDTP, K = 1 | 0.752 | 0.804 | 0.700 | 0.524 | 0.764 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.43 | 0.747 | 0.790 | 0.707 | 0.512 | 0.757 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.675 | 0.735 | 0.780 | 0.689 | 0.486 | 0.744 |
| 3D-GLCM | 0.746 | 0.755 | 0.740 | 0.511 | 0.746 |
Classifier RF classification results.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | MCC | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VLDTP, K = 1 | 0.819 | 0.858 | 0.778 | 0.640 | 0.826 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.43 | 0.811 | 0.844 | 0.779 | 0.624 | 0.817 |
| VLDTP, K = 0.675 | 0.801 | 0.844 | 0.757 | 0.604 | 0.809 |
| 3D-GLCM | 0.800 | 0.807 | 0.793 | 0.600 | 0.801 |
Comparison of different methods for identification of pulmonary nodules.
| Evaluation Criteria | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | F1 score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference [ | 0.8828 | 0.8382 | 0.8345 | |
| Reference [ | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | |
| Reference [ | 0.8636 | |||
| This paper | 0.931 | 0.918 | 0.905 | 0.919 |