| Literature DB >> 33238646 |
Thaddäus Hocotz1, Olga Bibikova2, Valeria Belikova3, Andrey Bogomolov3, Iskander Usenov2,4, Lukasz Pieszczek5, Tatiana Sakharova2, Olaf Minet6, Elena Feliksberger2, Viacheslav Artyushenko2, Beate Rau1, Urszula Zabarylo7.
Abstract
Cancers of the abdominal cavity comprise one of the most prevalent forms ofEntities:
Keywords: FTIR absorbance; cancer diagnostics; diffuse reflection; fibre probe; joint data analysis; mid-infrared spectroscopy; near-infrared spectroscopy; synergy effect
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33238646 PMCID: PMC7700420 DOI: 10.3390/s20226706
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Samples used for data evaluation.
| Organ | Number of Patients | Number of Samples | Cancer in Tumour Sample (Confirmed) | Absence of Cancer in Normal Sample (Confirmed) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stomach | 19 | 38 (19N, 19T) | 9 (T)/19 (T) | 15 (N)/19 (N) |
| Colon | 10 | 20 (10N, 10T) | 9 (T)/10 (T) | 10 (N)/10 (N) |
| Rectum | 6 | 12 (6N, 6T) | 6 (T)/6 (T) | 6 (N)/6 (N) |
Figure 1The mean spectra and the intervals of standard deviation for normal colon, stomach, and rectum samples: (a) unpreprocessed mid-infrared (MIR) spectra; (b) smoothed standard normal variate correction (SNV)-normalized near-infrared (NIR) spectra. The curves and the surrounding coloured regions represent the mean spectra and the standard deviation intervals of the respective data variables.
Figure 2The mean spectra and the standard deviation intervals of tumour (designated as T) and benign (designated as N) samples: (a) unpreprocessed mid-infrared (MIR) spectra of colon samples; (b) smoothed SNV-normalized near-infrared (NIR) spectra of colon samples; (c) unpreprocessed mid-infrared (MIR) spectra of rectum samples; (d) smoothed SNV-normalized near-infrared (NIR) spectra of rectum samples; (e) unpreprocessed mid-infrared (MIR) spectra of stomach samples; (f) smoothed SNV-normalized near-infrared (NIR) spectra of stomach samples. The curves and the surrounding coloured regions represent the mean spectra and the standard deviation intervals of the respective data variables.
Comparison of spectroscopic and data preprocessing methods for cancer diagnostics.
| # | Method | LV 1 | Pre-processing | Calibration 5 | Cross-Validation (Leave-One-Out) | Cross-Validation (Monte Carlo) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| %Se 2 | %Sp 3 | %Ac 4 | %Se 2 | %Sp 3 | %Ac 4 | %Se 2 | %Sp 3 | %Ac 4 | ||||
| Colon, Stomach, Rectum (CSR) samples set | ||||||||||||
| 1 | NIR | 5 | 2D, SNV | 84 | 84 | 84 | 70 | 76 | 74 | 64 | 78 | 72 |
| 2 | MIR | 5 | 2D, SNV | 82 | 81 | 82 | 74 | 78 | 76 | 70 | 70 | 70 |
| 3 | Combination | 5 | 2D, SNV | 2D, SNV | 91 | 94 | 93 | 72 | 90 | 82 | 68 | 86 | 78 |
| Colon samples set | ||||||||||||
| 4 | NIR | 5 | 2D | 92 | 89 | 90 | 72 | 81 | 77 | 62 | 74 | 69 |
| -* | 4 | 2D, SNV | 80 | 81 | 81 | 64 | 74 | 69 | 61 | 75 | 68 | |
| 5 | MIR | 5 | 2D, SNV | 96 | 96 | 96 | 72 | 78 | 75 | 78 | 83 | 80 |
| 6 | Combination | 5 | 2D, SNV | 2D, SNV | 100 | 96 | 98 | 92 | 93 | 92 | 84 | 96 | 90 |
| Stomach samples set | ||||||||||||
| 7 | NIR | 5 | 2D | 90 | 94 | 92 | 85 | 94 | 90 | 84 | 92 | 89 |
| -* | 5 | SNV | 75 | 94 | 87 | 60 | 81 | 73 | 61 | 82 | 74 | |
| 8 | MIR | 5 | 2D, SNV | 90 | 97 | 94 | 80 | 94 | 88 | 78 | 92 | 87 |
| 9 | Combination | 5 | SNV | 2D, SNV | 95 | 100 | 98 | 85 | 97 | 92 | 75 | 97 | 88 |
| Rectum samples set | ||||||||||||
| 10 | NIR | 5 | 2D | 100 | 100 | 100 | 92 | 67 | 81 | 87 | 58 | 75 |
| 11 | MIR | 5 | 2D | 100 | 100 | 100 | 92 | 78 | 86 | 94 | 81 | 89 |
| 12 | Combination | 5 | 2D | 2D | 100 | 100 | 100 | 92 | 89 | 90 | 96 | 83 | 90 |
1 Number of latent variables, 2 Sensitivity, 3 Specificity, 4 Accuracy, 5 Prediction on a dataset used for model calibration, * Additional models.
Figure 3Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-curve) of prediction of Leave-one-out (LOO) cross-validation (CV) for models from Table 2. (a) Models #1, 4, 7, 10 (models built using NIR data); (b) models #2, 5, 8, 11 (models built using MIR data); (c) models #3, 6, 9, 12 (models built using concatenated data).
Figure 4Variable importance in Projection (VIP) for models from Table 2. (a) Models #1, 4, 7, 10 (models built using NIR data); (b) models #2, 5, 8, 11 (models built using MIR data); (c) models #3, 6, 9, 12 (models built using concatenated data). Each curve was shifted up by 30% from the previous curve on the y-axis for better visualization of the VIP values. Models built using full datasets (colon, stomach, rectum: CSR) are shown in blue, red—colon datasets, yellow—stomach datasets and violet—rectum datasets.
Figure 5Calibration data (CD) of models built using single methods (before removing the mean centre): (a) CD of model #5—MIR dataset pretreated by 2D, SNV including only colon measurements; (b) CD of model #4—NIR dataset pretreated by 2D including only colon measurements; (c) CD of model #8—MIR dataset pretreated by 2D, SNV including only stomach measurements; (d) CD of model #7—NIR dataset pretreated by 2D including only stomach measurements; (e) CD of model #11—MIR dataset pretreated by 2D including only rectum measurements; (f) CD of model #10—NIR dataset pretreated by 2D including only rectum measurements.