| Literature DB >> 35785184 |
Kadiyala Ramana1, Madapuri Rudra Kumar2, K Sreenivasulu2, Thippa Reddy Gadekallu3, Surbhi Bhatia4, Parul Agarwal5, Sheikh Mohammad Idrees6.
Abstract
Lung cancer is the cellular fission of abnormal cells inside the lungs that leads to 72% of total deaths worldwide. Lung cancer are also recognized to be one of the leading causes of mortality, with a chance of survival of only 19%. Tumors can be diagnosed using a variety of procedures, including X-rays, CT scans, biopsies, and PET-CT scans. From the above techniques, Computer Tomography (CT) scan technique is considered to be one of the most powerful tools for an early diagnosis of lung cancers. Recently, machine and deep learning algorithms have picked up peak energy, and this aids in building a strong diagnosis and prediction system using CT scan images. But achieving the best performances in diagnosis still remains on the darker side of the research. To solve this problem, this paper proposes novel saliency-based capsule networks for better segmentation and employs the optimized pre-trained transfer learning for the better prediction of lung cancers from the input CT images. The integration of capsule-based saliency segmentation leads to the reduction and eventually reduces the risk of computational complexity and overfitting problem. Additionally, hyperparameters of pretrained networks are tuned by the whale optimization algorithm to improve the prediction accuracy by sacrificing the complexity. The extensive experimentation carried out using the LUNA-16 and LIDC Lung Image datasets and various performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, specificity, and F1-score are evaluated and analyzed. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed framework has achieved the peak performance of 98.5% accuracy, 99.0% precision, 98.8% recall, and 99.1% F1-score and outperformed the DenseNet, AlexNet, Resnets-50, Resnets-100, VGG-16, and Inception models.Entities:
Keywords: DenseNet; VGG-16; computer tomography (CT) scan images; inception models; pre-trained models; saliency segmentation; whale optimization
Year: 2022 PMID: 35785184 PMCID: PMC9247339 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.886739
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1(A) Normal CT Lung Image (B) Abnormal CT Lung Image (Cancer Image).
Figure 2Overall Working Flow Diagram for the Proposed Architectures.
Figure 3Sample CT-Lung Images after Augmentation Process.
Figure 4Capsule Architecture for the Saliency Based Segmentation.
Figure 5WOA Basic Structure.
Optimized Parameters for Whale Optimized Extreme Learning Networks.
| Sl.no | Parameters | Optimized Parameters |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | No. of Epochs | 100 |
| 2 | Learning Rate | 100% |
| 3 | No. of batches | 20 |
| 4 | Optimization Iterations | 19 |
| 5 | No. of hidden nodes | 78 |
Total Number of Datasets (After Augmentation).
| Sl.no | Total Number of Images | Training Data (%) | Testing Data (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 78090 | 80 | 20 |
Different deep learning architectures’ performance such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and recall in predicting benign tissue in lung CT images.
| Algorithm Details | Performance Metrics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Precision (%) | F1-Score (%) | |
| CNN | 78 | 77.6 | 0.0224 | 77 | 76.5 |
| Resnets-100 | 81.44 | 81.45 | 0.0019 | 80.8 | 81.2 |
| Resnets-150 | 86.21 | 85.0 | 0.0150 | 86.9 | 86.3 |
| Inception V3 | 89.28 | 88.623 | 0.0127 | 88.4 | 87.9 |
| Mobile Nets | 85.32 | 84.5 | 0.00156 | 85.9 | 84.75 |
| Google nets | 86.57 | 85.8 | 0.00145 | 86.9 | 84.89 |
| SegCaps | 91.2 | 91.8 | 0.0090 | 91.3 | 90.67 |
| Proposed Framework | 98.95 | 98.85 | 0.0015 | 98.9 | 98.89 |
Figure 6ROC curves for the proposed architecture in detecting (A) normal (B) benign and (C) malignant images.
Figure 7Confusion matrix for the proposed architecture using 900 random tested images.
Different deep learning architectures’ performance such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and recall in predicting normal tissue in lung CT images.
| Algorithm Details | Performance Metrics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Precision (%) | F1-Score (%) | |
| CNN | 80.2 | 78.5 | 0.0224 | 78.4 | 78.3 |
| Resnets-100 | 81.5 | 80.5 | 0.0020 | 81.3 | 81.2 |
| Resnets-150 | 86,2 | 86.0 | 0.0142 | 85.7 | 85 |
| Inception V3 | 88.78 | 87.67 | 0.013 | 84.3 | 83.5 |
| Mobile Nets | 86.5 | 85.6 | 0.0015 | 85.2 | 85.0 |
| Densenet-169 | 85.54 | 84.67 | 0.00167 | 84.5 | 84.6 |
| SegCaps | 91.0 | 90.8 | 0.0010 | 90.6 | 90.7 |
| Proposed Framework | 98.95 | 98.85 | 0.0010 | 98.75 | 98.85 |
Different deep learning architectures’ performance such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and recall in predicting malignant cancer in lung CT images.
| Algorithm Details | Performance Metrics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Precision (%) | F1-Score (%) | |
| CNN | 80 | 78 | 0.0224 | 77.7 | 78.2 |
| Resnets-100 | 81.5 | 80.5 | 0.0020 | 81.3 | 81.3 |
| Resnets-150 | 86.32 | 86.0 | 0.0142 | 85.7 | 85 |
| Inception V3 | 88.78 | 87.67 | 0.013 | 84.3 | 83.5 |
| Mobile Nets | 86.5 | 85.6 | 0.0015 | 85.2 | 85.0 |
| Google nets | 83.784 | 82.9 | 0.0018 | 81.9 | 81.2 |
| SegCaps | 92.0 | 92.83 | 0.0080 | 91.0 | 91.6 |
| Proposed Framework | 98.95 | 98.85 | 0.0010 | 98.75 | 98.85 |
Figure 8Performance analysis in predicting normal tissue in lung CT images.
Figure 10Performance analysis in predicting malignant cancer in lung CT images.