| Literature DB >> 35684627 |
Suliman Aladhadh1, Majed Alsanea2, Mohammed Aloraini3, Taimoor Khan4, Shabana Habib1, Muhammad Islam5.
Abstract
Skin Cancer (SC) is considered the deadliest disease in the world, killing thousands of people every year. Early SC detection can increase the survival rate for patients up to 70%, hence it is highly recommended that regular head-to-toe skin examinations are conducted to determine whether there are any signs or symptoms of SC. The use of Machine Learning (ML)-based methods is having a significant impact on the classification and detection of SC diseases. However, there are certain challenges associated with the accurate classification of these diseases such as a lower detection accuracy, poor generalization of the models, and an insufficient amount of labeled data for training. To address these challenges, in this work we developed a two-tier framework for the accurate classification of SC. During the first stage of the framework, we applied different methods for data augmentation to increase the number of image samples for effective training. As part of the second tier of the framework, taking into consideration the promising performance of the Medical Vision Transformer (MVT) in the analysis of medical images, we developed an MVT-based classification model for SC. This MVT splits the input image into image patches and then feeds these patches to the transformer in a sequence structure, like word embedding. Finally, Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) is used to classify the input image into the corresponding class. Based on the experimental results achieved on the Human Against Machine (HAM10000) datasets, we concluded that the proposed MVT-based model achieves better results than current state-of-the-art techniques for SC classification.Entities:
Keywords: Medical Vision Transformer; artificial intelligence; medical images; skin cancer
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35684627 PMCID: PMC9182815 DOI: 10.3390/s22114008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Visual effects of data augmentation steps.
Figure 2Proposed MVT-based SC classification framework.
Number of images for each class before and after the preprocessing stage.
| No. | Class | Number of Images | Number of Images |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before Preprocessing | After Preprocessing | ||
| 1 | Akiec | 327 | 1099 |
| 2 | Bcc | 541 | 1099 |
| 3 | Bkl | 1099 | 1099 |
| 4 | Df | 155 | 1099 |
| 5 | Nv | 6705 | 6705 |
| 6 | Mel | 1113 | 1113 |
| 7 | Vasc | 142 | 1099 |
Figure 3Sample images from the HAM10000 dataset.
Confusion matrix of the proposed model without the preprocessing stage.
| Class | Akiec | Bcc | Bkl | Df | Mel | Nv | Vasc | Class-Wise Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Akiec | 0.97 | 0.02 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.01 | 0.0 | 97.00% |
| Bcc | 0.09 | 0.81 | 0.07 | 0.0 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 81.00% |
| Bkl | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.83 | 0.0 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.0 | 83.00% |
| Df | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100% |
| Mel | 0.02 | 0.0 | 0.08 | 0.0 | 0.78 | 0.12 | 0.0 | 78.00% |
| Nv | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.02 | 0.0 | 0.04 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 93.00% |
| Vasc | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 100% |
Confusion matrix of the proposed model with the preprocessing stage.
| Class | Akiec | Bcc | Bkl | Df | Mel | Nv | Vasc | Class-Wise Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Akiec | 0.96 | 0.01 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.02 | 0.1 | 96.00% |
| Bcc | 0.01 | 0.91 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.0 | 91.00% |
| Bkl | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.94 | 0.0 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.0 | 94.00% |
| Df | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100% |
| Mel | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.03 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 0.02 | 0.0 | 95.00% |
| Nv | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.02 | 0.97 | 0.01 | 97.00% |
| Vasc | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 100% |
Figure 4Training/validation accuracy and loss of the proposed model without the preprocessing (a) accuracy and (b) loss.
Figure 5Classification report of our model used without the preprocessing stage.
Figure 6Training/validation accuracy and loss of the proposed model with the preprocessing (a) accuracy and (b) loss.
Figure 7Classification report of our model using the preprocessing stage.
Comparison of the proposed method with state-of-the-art methods.
| Reference | Precision | Recall/ | F1-Measure | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attique et al. [ | 92.22 | 84.20 | 88.03 | 95.80 |
| Gupta et al. [ | 89.00 | 83.00 | 83.00 | 83.10 |
| Chaturvedi et al. [ | 88.00 | 88.00 | 88.00 | 93.20 |
| Huang et al. [ | 75.18 | -- | -- | 85.80 |
| Carcagni et al. [ | 88.00 | 76.00 | 82.00 | 90.00 |
| Shahin et al. [ | 86.20 | 79.60 | 82.90 | 89.90 |
| Jain et al. [ | 88.76 | 89.57 | 89.02 | 90.48 |
| The proposed method | 96.00 | 96.50 | 97.00 | 96.14 |
Figure 8Samples of a heat-map for each class.