| Literature DB >> 34065430 |
Mehwish Dildar1, Shumaila Akram2, Muhammad Irfan3, Hikmat Ullah Khan4, Muhammad Ramzan2,5, Abdur Rehman Mahmood6, Soliman Ayed Alsaiari7, Abdul Hakeem M Saeed8, Mohammed Olaythah Alraddadi9, Mater Hussen Mahnashi10.
Abstract
Skin cancer is one of the most dangerous forms of cancer. Skin cancer is caused by un-repaired deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in skin cells, which generate genetic defects or mutations on the skin. Skin cancer tends to gradually spread over other body parts, so it is more curable in initial stages, which is why it is best detected at early stages. The increasing rate of skin cancer cases, high mortality rate, and expensive medical treatment require that its symptoms be diagnosed early. Considering the seriousness of these issues, researchers have developed various early detection techniques for skin cancer. Lesion parameters such as symmetry, color, size, shape, etc. are used to detect skin cancer and to distinguish benign skin cancer from melanoma. This paper presents a detailed systematic review of deep learning techniques for the early detection of skin cancer. Research papers published in well-reputed journals, relevant to the topic of skin cancer diagnosis, were analyzed. Research findings are presented in tools, graphs, tables, techniques, and frameworks for better understanding.Entities:
Keywords: deep learning; deep neural network (DNN); machine learning; melanoma; skin lesion; support vector machine (SVM)
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34065430 PMCID: PMC8160886 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18105479
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The process of skin cancer detection. ANN = Artificial neural network; CNN = Convolutional neural network; KNN = Kohonen self-organizing neural network; GAN = Generative adversarial neural network.
Search terms.
| Search Term | Set of Keywords |
|---|---|
| Skin * | Skin cancer, skin diseases, skin treatment |
| Cancer * | Cancer disease, cancer types, cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment |
| Deep * | Deep learning, deep neural networks |
| Neural * | Neural network, neural networking |
| Network * | Neural network, neural networking |
| Melano * | Networking, network types |
| NonMelano * | Melanoma skin cancer, melanoma death rate, melanoma treatment, melanoma diagnosis, melanoma causes, melanoma symptoms |
| Basal * | Basal cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma skin cancer, basal cell carcinoma diagnosis, basal cell carcinoma causes, basal cell carcinoma symptoms |
| Squamous * | Squamous cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma skin cancer, squamous cell carcinoma diagnosis, squamous cell carcinoma causes, squamous cell carcinoma symptoms |
| Artificial * | Artificial neural network, artificial neural networking, |
| Back * | Backpropagation neural network |
| Conv * | Convolutional neural network |
* = All words that start with the string written before asterisk *.
Search results.
| Sr. No | Resource | Initial Search | Title-Based | Abstract-Based | Full Paper-Based |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | IEEE Xplore | 123 | 21 | 15 | 13 |
| 2 | Google Scholar | 451 | 29 | 11 | 8 |
| 3 | ACM DL | 327 | 19 | 9 | 5 |
| 4 | Springer | 235 | 11 | 17 | 15 |
| 5 | Science Direct | 347 | 15 | 12 | 10 |
| Total | 1483 | 95 | 64 | 51 |
Figure 2Skin disease categories from International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) dataset [12].
Figure 3Basic ANN structure [13].
Figure 4Skin cancer detection using ANN [19].
A comparative analysis of skin cancer detection using ANN-based approaches.
| Ref | Skin Cancer | Classifier and Training | Dataset | Description | Results (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Melanoma | ANN with backpropagation algorithm | 31 dermoscopic images | ABCD parameters for feature extraction, | Accuracy (96.9) |
| [ | Melanoma/Non- melanoma | ANN with backpropagation algorithm | 90 dermoscopic images | maximum entropy for thresholding, and gray- level co-occurrence matrix for features extraction | Accuracy (86.66) |
| [ | Cancerous/non- cancerous | ANN with backpropagation algorithm | 31 dermoscopic images | 2D-wavelet transform for feature extraction and thresholding for segmentation | Nil |
| [ | Malignant | Feed-forward ANN with the backpropagation training algorithm | 326 lesion | Color and shape characteristics of the tumor were used as discriminant features for classification | Accuracy (80) |
| [ | Malignant/non-Malignant | Backpropagation neural network as NN classifier | 448 mixed-type images | ROI and SRM for segmentation | Accuracy (70.4) |
| [ | Cancerous/noncancerous | ANN with backpropagation algorithm | 30 cancerous/noncancerous images | RGB color features and GLCM techniques for feature extraction | Accuracy (86.66) |
| [ | Common mole/non-common mole/melanoma | Feed-forward BPNN | 200 dermoscopic images | Features extracted according to ABCD rule | Accuracy (97.51) |
| [ | Cancerous/noncancerous | Artificial neural network with backpropagation algorithm | 50 dermoscopic images | GLCM technique for feature extraction | Accuracy (88) |
| [ | BCC/non-BCC | ANN | 180 skin lesion images | Histogram equalization for contrast enhancement | Reliability (93.33) |
| [ | Melanoma/Non-melanoma | ANN with Levenberg–Marquardt (LM), resilient backpropagation (RBP), and scaled conjugate gradient (GCG) learning algorithms | 135 lesion | Combination of multiple classifiers to avoid the misclassification | Accuracy (SCG:91.9, LM: 95.1, RBP:88.1) |
| [ | Malignant/benign | ANN meta-ensemble model consisting of BPN and fuzzy neural network | Caucasian race and xanthous-race datasets | Self-generating neural network was used for | Accuracy (94.17) |
ANN = Artificial neural network, NN = Neural network. ROI = Region of interest, SRM = Statistical region merging, GLCM = Gray level co-occurrence matrix, BPNN = Backpropagation neural network.
Figure 5Basic CNN Architecture [9].
Figure 6Skin cancer diagnosis using CNN [37].
A comparative analysis of skin cancer detection using CNN-based approaches.
| Ref | Skin Cancer Diagnoses | Classifier and Training | Dataset | Description | Results (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Benign/malignant | LightNet (deep learning framework), used for classification | ISIC 2016 dataset | Fewer parameters and well suited for mobile applications | Accuracy (81.6), sensitivity (14.9), specificity (98) |
| [ | Melanoma/benign | CNN classifier | 170 skin lesion images | Two convolving layers in CNN | Accuracy (81), sensitivity (81), specificity (80) |
| [ | BCC/SCC/melanoma/AK | SVM with deep CNN | 3753 dermoscopic images | Pertained to deep CNN and AlexNet for features extraction | Accuracy (SCC: 95.1, AK: 98.9, BCC: 94.17) |
| [ | Melanoma /benign | Deep CNN | ISIC-Dermoscopic Archive | Expert-level performance against 21 certified dermatologists | Accuracy (72.1) |
| [ | Malignant melanoma and BC carcinoma | CNN with Res-Net 152 architecture | The first dataset has 170 images the second dataset contains 1300 images | Augmentor Python library for augmentation. | AUC (melanoma: 96, BCC: 91) |
| [ | Melanoma/nonmelanoma | SVM-trained, with CNN, extracted features | DermIS dataset and DermQuest data | A median filter for noise removal and CNN for feature extraction | Accuracy (93.75) |
| [ | Malignant melanoma/nevus/SK | CNN as single neural-net architecture | ISIC 2017 dataset | CNN ensemble of AlexNet, VGGNet, and GoogleNetfor classification | Average AUC:9 84.8), average accuracy (83.8) |
| [ | BCC/nonBCC | CNN | 40 FF-OCT images | Trained CNN, consisted of 10 layers for features extraction | Accuracy (95.93), sensitivity (95.2), specificity (96.54) |
| [ | Cancerous/noncancerous | CNN | 1730 skin lesion and background images | Focused on edge detection | Accuracy (86.67) |
| [ | Benign/melanoma | VGG-16 and CNN | ISIC dataset | Dataset was trained on three separate learning models | Accuracy (78) |
| [ | Benign/malignant | CNN | ISIC database | ABCD symptomatic checklist for feature extraction | Accuracy (89.5) |
| [ | Melanoma/benign keratosis/ melanocytic nevi/BCC/AK/IC/atypical nevi/dermatofibroma/vascular lesions | Deep CNN architecture (DenseNet 201, Inception v3, ResNet 152 and | HAM10000 and PH2 dataset | Deep learning models outperformed highly trained dermatologists in overall mean results by at least 11% | ROC AUC |
| [ | Lipoma/fibroma/sclerosis/melanoma | Deep region-based CNN | ISIC dataset | Combination of the region-based CNN and fuzzy C-means ensured more accuracy in disease detection | Accuracy (94.8) sensitivity (97.81) specificity (94.17) F1_score (95.89) |
| [ | Malignant/benign | 6-layers deep CNN | MED-NODE and ISIC datasets | Illumination factor in images affected performance of the system | Accuracy (77.50) |
| [ | Melanoma/non melanoma | Hybrid of fully CNN with autoencoder and decoder and RNN | ISIC dataset | Proposed model outperformed state-of-art SegNet, FCN, and ExB architecture | Accuracy (98) Jaccard index (93), sensitivity (95), specificity (94) |
| [ | Benign/malignant | 2-layer CNN with a novel regularizer | ISIC dataset | Proposed regularization technique controlled complexity by adding a penalty on the dispersion value of classifier’s weight matrix | Accuracy (97.49) AUC (98), sensitivity (94.3), specificity (93.6) |
| [ | Malignant melanoma/SK | SVM classification with features extracted with pretrained deep models named AlexNet, ResNet-18, and VGG16 | ISIC dataset | SVM scores were mapped to | Average AUC (90.69) |
| [ | Melanoma/BCC/melanocytic nevus/Bowen’s disease/AK/benign keratosis/vascular lesion/dermatofibroma | InceptionResNetV2, PNASNet-5-Large, | ISIC dataset | A trained image-net model was used to initialize network parameters and fine-tuning | Validation Score (76) |
| [ | melanoma/BCC/melanocytic nevus/AK/benign keratosis/vascular lesion/dermatofibroma | CNN model with | ISIC dataset | The adaptive piecewise linear activation function was used to increase system performance | Accuracy (95.86) |
| [ | Benign/malignant | Deep CNN | ISIC dataset | Data augmentation was performed for data balancing | Accuracy (80.3), precision (81), AUC (69) |
| [ | Compound nevus/malignant melanoma | CNN | AtlasDerm, Derma, Dermnet, Danderm, DermIS and DermQuest datasets | BVLC-AlexNet model, pretrained from ImageNet dataset was used for fine-tuning | Mean average precision (70) |
| [ | Melanoma/SK | Deep multi-scale CNN | ISIC dataset | The proposed model used Inception-v3 model, which was trained on the ImageNet. | Accuracy (90.3), AUC (94.3) |
| [ | Benign/malignant | CNN with 5-fold cross-validation | 1760 dermoscopic images | Images were preprocessed on the basis of melanoma cytological findings | Accuracy (84.7), sensitivity (80.9), |
| [ | Benign/malignant | A very deep residual CNN and FCRN | ISIC 2016 database | FCRN incorporated with a multi-scale contextual information integration technique was proposed for accurate lesions segmentation | Accuracy (94.9), sensitivity (91.1), specificity (95.7), Jaccard index (82.9), dice coefficient (89.7) |
| [ | AK/melanocytic nevus/BCC/SK/SCC | CNN | 1300 skin lesion images | Mean subtraction for each image, pooled multi-scale feature extraction process and pooling in augmented-feature space | Accuracy (81.8) |
| [ | BCC/non-BCC | Pruned ResNet18 | 297 FF-OCT images | K-fold cross-validation was applied to measure the performance of the proposed system | Accuracy (80) |
| [ | Melanoma/non melanoma | ResNet-50 with deep transfer learning | 3600 lesion images from the ISIC dataset | The proposed model showed better performance than o InceptionV3, Densenet169, Inception ResNetV2, and Mobilenet | Accuracy (93.5), precision (94) |
| [ | Benign/malignant | Region-based CNN with ResNet152 | 2742 dermoscopic images from ISIC dataset | Region of interest was extracted by mask and region-based CNN, then ResNet152 is used for classification. | Accuracy (90.4), sensitivity (82), |
CNN = Convolutional neural network; ISIC = International skin imaging collaboration; SVM = Support vector machine; BCC = Basal cell carcinoma; SCC = Squamous cell carcinoma; AK = Actinic keratosis; IC = Intraepithelial carcinoma; HAM10000 = Human-against-machine dataset with 10,000 images; BVLC = Berkeley Vision and Learning Center; SK= Seborrheic keratosis; FCRN = Fully convolutional residual network; FF-OCT = Full field optical coherence tomography; FCN = Fully convolutional network.
Figure 7Basic KNN structure [58], BMU= Best matching unit.
A comparative analysis of skin cancer detection using KNN-based approaches.
| Ref | Skin Cancer | Classifier and Training Algorithm | Dataset | Description | Results (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Melanoma/nevus/normal skin | SOM and feed-forward NN | 50 skin lesion images | PCA for decreasing spectra’s dimensionality | Accuracy (96–98) |
| [ | BCC, SCC, and melanoma | SOM and RBF | DermQuest and Dermnet datasets | 15 features consisting of GCM morphological and color features were extracted | Accuracy (93.15) |
| [ | Cancerous/noncancerous | Modified KNN | 500 lesion images | Automated Otsu method of thresholding for segmentation | Accuracy (98.3) |
SOM = Self organizing map; PCA = Principal component analysis; GCM = Generalized co-occurrence matrices; RBF = Radial Basis Function; KNN = Kohonen self-organizing neural network.
Figure 8GAN architecture [64].
A comparative analysis of skin cancer detection using GAN-based approaches.
| Ref | Skin Cancer Diagnoses | Classifier and Training Algorithm | Dataset | Description | Results (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | AK/BCC/benign keratosis/dermatofibroma/melanoma/melanocytic nevus/vascular lesion | GAN | ISIC 2018 | The proposed system used deconvolutional network and CNN as generator and discriminator module | Accuracy (86.1) |
| [ | Melanoma/nevus/SK | Deep convolutional GAN | ISIC 2017, ISIC 2018, PH2 | Decoupled deep convolutional GANs for data augmentation | ROC AUC (91.5), accuracy (86.1) |
| [ | BCC/vascular/pigmented benign keratosis/pigmented Bowen’s/nevus/dermatofibroma | Self-attention-based PGAN | ISIC 2018 | A generative model was enhanced with a stabilization technique | Accuracy (70.1) |
GAN = Generative adversarial neural network, PGAN = Progressive generative adversarial network, ROC AUC= Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Skin Cancer Datasets.
| Sr. No | Name of Dataset | Year of Release | No. of Images | Reference Used |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HAM10000 | 2018 | 10,015 | [ |
| 2 | PH2 | 2013 | 200 | [ |
| 3 | ISIC archive | 2016 | 25,331 | [ |
| 4 | DermQuest | 1999 | 22,082 | [ |
| 5 | DermIS | 6588 | [ | |
| 6 | AtlasDerm | 2000 | 1024 | [ |
| 7 | Dermnet | 1998 | 23,000 | [ |