| Literature DB >> 33343851 |
Nighat Bibi1, Misba Sikandar1, Ikram Ud Din1, Ahmad Almogren2, Sikandar Ali3.
Abstract
For the last few years, computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) has been increasing rapidly. Numerous machine learning algorithms have been developed to identify different diseases, e.g., leukemia. Leukemia is a white blood cells- (WBC-) related illness affecting the bone marrow and/or blood. A quick, safe, and accurate early-stage diagnosis of leukemia plays a key role in curing and saving patients' lives. Based on developments, leukemia consists of two primary forms, i.e., acute and chronic leukemia. Each form can be subcategorized as myeloid and lymphoid. There are, therefore, four leukemia subtypes. Various approaches have been developed to identify leukemia with respect to its subtypes. However, in terms of effectiveness, learning process, and performance, these methods require improvements. This study provides an Internet of Medical Things- (IoMT-) based framework to enhance and provide a quick and safe identification of leukemia. In the proposed IoMT system, with the help of cloud computing, clinical gadgets are linked to network resources. The system allows real-time coordination for testing, diagnosis, and treatment of leukemia among patients and healthcare professionals, which may save both time and efforts of patients and clinicians. Moreover, the presented framework is also helpful for resolving the problems of patients with critical condition in pandemics such as COVID-19. The methods used for the identification of leukemia subtypes in the suggested framework are Dense Convolutional Neural Network (DenseNet-121) and Residual Convolutional Neural Network (ResNet-34). Two publicly available datasets for leukemia, i.e., ALL-IDB and ASH image bank, are used in this study. The results demonstrated that the suggested models supersede the other well-known machine learning algorithms used for healthy-versus-leukemia-subtypes identification.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33343851 PMCID: PMC7732373 DOI: 10.1155/2020/6648574
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Blood and leukemia types.
Figure 2Proposed framework for automated leukemia diagnosis.
Figure 3Proposed methodology.
Figure 4Leukemia subtype images. (a) Acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL). (b) Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). (c) Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). (d) Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). (e) Healthy.
Distribution of leukemia subtypes before and after augmentation.
| Leukemia type | Dataset | Before augmentation | After augmentation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALL | ALL-IDB | 181 | 1079 |
| AML | ASH image bank | 55 | 1194 |
| CLL | ASH image bank | 38 | 840 |
| CML | ASH image bank | 57 | 1243 |
| Healthy | ALL-IDB | 187 | 1280 |
Figure 5General architecture of ResNet-34 (adapted from [28]).
Figure 6General architecture of DenseNet-121 (adapted from [29]).
Performance measures mathematical description.
| Measure | Derivations |
|---|---|
| Accuracy | ACC = (TP + TN)/(P + N) |
| Precision | PPV = TP/(TP + FP) |
| Recall | TPR = TP/(TP + FN) |
| F1 score | F1 = 2TP/(2TP + FP + FN) |
Figure 7Confusion matrix of ResNet-34 for leukemia subtype classification.
Figure 8Confusion matrix of DenseNet-121 for leukemia subtype classification.
Performance of the ResNet-34 model for leukemia subtype classification.
| Leukemia type | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALL | 100 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| AML | 99.65 | 1.0 | 0.99 | 0.99 |
| CLL | 99.73 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 |
| CML | 99.73 | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.99 |
| Healthy | 100 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Performance of the DenseNet-121 model for leukemia subtype classification.
| Leukemia type | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALL | 100 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| AML | 99.91 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| CLL | 99.91 | 1.0 | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| CML | 100 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Healthy | 100 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Figure 9Training and validation loss of ResNet-34.
Figure 10Training and validation loss of DenseNet-121.
Figure 11Accuracy comparison of the ResNet-34 and DenseNet-121 for leukemia subtype classification.
Figure 12Comparison of the studies on automated detection of subtypes of leukemia.
A comparison of the proposed models with the previous approaches for automated detection of leukemia and its subtypes using the same datasets with respect to average accuracy.
| Reference | Dataset | Classification | Classifier | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahmed et al. [ | ALL-IDB | Leukemia vs healthy | CNN | 88.25 |
| Naive Bayes | 69.69 | |||
| Decision tree | 62.94 | |||
| KNN | 58.57 | |||
| SVM | 50.09 | |||
| ALL-IDB, ASH image bank | Leukemia subtypes classification | CNN | 81.74 | |
| Naive Bayes | 52.68 | |||
| Decision tree | 45.92 | |||
| KNN | 43.51 | |||
| SVM | 20.84 | |||
| Shafique et al. [ | ALL-IDB | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | AlexNet | 99.50 |
| Subtypes of acute lymphoblastic leukemia | AlexNet | 96.06 | ||
| Jothi et al. [ | ALL-IDB | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | Jaya, SVM | 99.00 |
| Jaya, decision tree | 98.00 | |||
| Acharya et al. [ | ALL-IDB | White blood cells | K-medoids algorithm | 98.60 |
| Mishra et al. [ | ALL-IDB1 | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | DOST, PCA, LDA | 99.66 |
| Tuba et al. [ | ALL-IDB2 | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | GAO-based methods | 93.84 |
| Al-jaboriy et al. [ | ALL-IDB1 | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | GA and ANN | 97.07 |
| Jha et al. [ | ALL-IDB2 | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | SCA-based deep CNN | 98.70 |
| Pansombut et al. [ | ASH image bank, ALL-IDB1 | Lymphoblast cells | CNN-based convnet | 81.74 |
| Vogado et al. [ | Heterogeneous database ALL-IDB1, ALL-IDB2 | Diagnose leukemia (pathological or not) | Pre-trained CNN with SVM | 99 |
| Thanh et al. [ | ALL-IDB1 | Diagnose leukemia (normal vs abnormal) | CNN | 96.60 |
| Moshavash et al. [ | ALL-IDB1, ALL-IDB2, Dr. Juan Bruno Zayas Alfonso Hospital, Santiago de Cuba | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia detection | Two ensemble classifiers with SVM | 89.81 |
| Umamaheswari et al. [ | ALL-IDB2 | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia | Customized KNN | 96.25 |
| Agaian et al. [ | ALL-IDB1 | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia | Cell energy feature with SVM | 94.00 |
| Rawat et al. [ | ASH image bank | ALL | GA with SVM | 97.10 |
| AML | 98.50 | |||
| Healthy, AML,ALL | 99.50 | |||
| Proposed work | ALL-IDB, ASH image bank | Healthy, ALL, AML, CLL and CML | ResNet-34 | 99.56 |
| DenseNet-121 | 99.91 |