| Literature DB >> 35919632 |
Jiaoju Wang1, Yan Luo2, Zheng Wang1,3, Alphonse Houssou Hounye1, Cong Cao1, Muzhou Hou1, Jianglin Zhang4,5.
Abstract
Acne vulgaris, the most common skin disease, can cause substantial economic and psychological impacts to the people it affects, and its accurate grading plays a crucial role in the treatment of patients. In this paper, we firstly proposed an acne grading criterion that considers lesion classifications and a metric for producing accurate severity ratings. Due to similar appearance of acne lesions with comparable severities and difficult-to-count lesions, severity assessment is a challenging task. We cropped facial skin images of several lesion patches and then addressed the acne lesion with a lightweight acne regular network (Acne-RegNet). Acne-RegNet was built by using a median filter and histogram equalization to improve image quality, a channel attention mechanism to boost the representational power of network, a region-based focal loss to handle classification imbalances and a model pruning and feature-based knowledge distillation to reduce model size. After the application of Acne-RegNet, the severity score is calculated, and the acne grading is further optimized by the metadata of the patients. The entire acne assessment procedure was deployed to a mobile device, and a phone app was designed. Compared with state-of-the-art lightweight models, the proposed Acne-RegNet significantly improves the accuracy of lesion classifications. The acne app demonstrated promising results in severity assessments (accuracy: 94.56%) and showed a dermatologist-level diagnosis on the internal clinical dataset.The proposed acne app could be a useful adjunct to assess acne severity in clinical practice and it enables anyone with a smartphone to immediately assess acne, anywhere and anytime.Entities:
Keywords: Acne regular network; Acne vulgaris; Cell phone app; Deep learning(DL); Severity assessment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35919632 PMCID: PMC9336136 DOI: 10.1007/s10489-022-03774-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Intell (Dordr) ISSN: 0924-669X Impact factor: 5.019
Fig. 1Flowchart of the proposed auxiliary diagnosis app based on the Acne-RegNet model
Severity criteria and Treatment strategy
| Severity criteria and treatment strategy | Severity rating | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mild | Moderate | Severe | Very severe | |
| Severity criteria | 1 < | 40 < | 90 < | |
| Treatment strategy | Topical retinoid or Fixed combination with retinoid or benzoyl peroxide or Salicylic acid or Azelaic acid | Fixed combination or benzoyl peroxide or Topical Retinoid or Azelaic Acid | Fixed combination Preferred + Hormonal therapy or Oral Antibiotic | Fixed combination + Oral Antibiotic Preferred or Oral Isotretinoin or Oral Hormonal therapy |
Fig. 2Acne lesion classification architectures( a) The classification architecture consists of a stem (3 × 3 conv), gradually followed by the main body network (four stages) that performs the bulk of the computations, and then a head (ECANet followed by an adaptive average pooling and fully connected layer) that predicts five output classes. In particular, each stage is composed of a sequence of blocks that is a residual bottleneck with a group conv and SE module. ( b) Take the trained network (the detailed structure shown in (a)) as the teacher model. The training images are simultaneously used as the input to the teacher model and the student model. The extracted feature maps are then transformed to probability distributions as the knowledge to supervise the training of the student model, causing the student model to obtain a comparable performance with the teacher model
Fig. 3Implementation of a cell phone app for facial acne grading a): An acne patient simply downloads the app onto his/her smartphone, opens the app and registers and logs into the treatment center. They can first choose the button ‘shooting diagnosis’, activate the ‘Start Testing’ button to take his/her facial photograph, and then tap on the screen to select the lesion regions. The initial diagnosis results and suggested medication can be obtained without the need for additional smartphone attachments. If they want a more personalized diagnosis, their personal metadata (see in (b)) needs to be provided in the treatment center, and then fine-tuned diagnosis results can be obtained. b): After the facial photo is obtained, the user selects the lesion areas and uploads them. The uploaded images are cut to 80 × 80 for the input to the DL model, and the classification labels of all the patches can be obtained. Then, the severity score is calculated, and the acne grade (0,1,2,3,4) is output. If the metadata were provided, they can be transformed to fine-tune the severity score and diagnosis results
Private dataset characteristics
| Characteristics | Development set | Assessment set |
|---|---|---|
| Months | (From Jan to May, 2020) | (From Jun to Aug,2020) |
| Number | 1515 | 1764 |
| Age(years):median (25th, 75th percentiles) | 24(20,33) | 20(19,23) |
| Female(%) | 1014(66.93%) | 1020(57.82%) |
| Chinese Han nationality(%) | 1494(98.61%) | 1728(97.96%) |
| BMI(m):median (25th, 75th percentiles) | 20.24(18.94,22.03) | 20.35(19.02,22.11) |
| x Skin types: | ||
| Oily skin(%) | 783(51.68%) | 828(46.94%) |
| Dry skin(%) | 123(8.12%) | 264(14.96%) |
| Mixed skin(%) | 609(40.20%) | 672(38.1%) |
| Skin conditions based on diagnosis: | ||
| Mild(%) | 300(19.80%) | 660(37.41%) |
| Moderate(%) | 459(30.30%) | 684(38.78%) |
| Severe(%) | 573(37.82%) | 360(20.41%) |
| Very severe(%) | 183(12.08%) | 60(3.40%) |
BMI: Body Mass Index; Jan: January; Jun:June; Aug:august
Fig. 4Example of automatic facial acne diagnosis using app
Performance robustness of models when training data reduced from 80% to 60%
| Methods | Accuracy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.80(5-fold,%) | 0.75(5-fold,%) | 0.70(3-fold,%) | 0.65(3-fold,%) | 0.60(3-fold,%) | |
| MobileNet-V3 [ | 89.01 ± 0.94 | 87.63 ± 1.10 | 87.24 ± 0.90 | 86.78 ± 0.65 | 86.10 ± 0.78 |
| SENet [ | 84.89 ± 1.14 | 83.93 ± 0.99 | 83.17 ± 0.76 | 82.42 ± 0.83 | 82.34 ± 0.83 |
| EfficientNet-B0 [ | 92.21 ± 0.90 | 91.34 ± 1.16 | 91.14 ± 0.92 | 90.96 ± 0.88 | 90.74 ± 0.97 |
| GhostNet [ | 92.31 ± 1.10 | 91.51 ± 1.11 | 91.25 ± 0.94 | 90.79 ± 0.91 | 90.30 ± 0.90 |
| Acne-RegNet | 94.13 ± 0.92 | 93.61 ± 1.04 | 93.14 ± 0.98 | 92.80 ± 0.79 | 92.39 ± 0.80 |
Fig. 5Performance of segmentation model and Acne-RegNet model a. The mIoU and mPA for each region on the test set (n = 300) are presented, which range from 0 to 1. The blue and pink bars denote the mIoU and mPA, respectively. Error bars in a and d indicate 95% confidence intervals. b. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for comedone, nodules, normal, pimples and pustules are shown with different colors. c. The horizontal axis represents the ground-truth categories, and the vertical axis denotes the predicted labels. The correct classification numbers of acne, nodule, normal, acn, and pustule were 114, 116, 254, 430 and 92, respectively. d. The precision, recall, specificity and F1 score for each lesion class are presented, which are shown by bars of different colors
The ablation study of refinements on a test set
| Methods | Params (M) | Flops (G) | Infer (ms) | Acc (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | RegNet | 5.50 | 0.81 | 22 | 88.56 |
| B | + Data preprocessed | 5.50 | 0.81 | 22 | 91.01 |
| C | + ECANet | 5.50 | 0.81 | 22 | 92.52 |
| D | + Pretrained | 5.50 | 0.81 | 22 | 93.83 |
| E | + Focal loss | 5.50 | 0.81 | 22 | 95.04 |
| F | + Pruning | 4.67 | 0.81 | 19 | 94.86 |
| G | + Smaller input | 4.67 | 0.21 | 14 | 94.11 |
| H | + KD | 2.31 | 0.05 | 7 | 94.11 |
Params: Parameters; Acc: Accuracy; KD: Knowledge distillation
Comparison with state-of-the-art lightweight models
| Methods | Params(M) | Flops(G) | Acc(training set) | Acc(test set) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MobileNet-V3 [ | 4.21 | 0.22 | 92.23% | 88.11% |
| SENet [ | 0.25 | 90.94% | 84.93% | |
| EfficientNet-B0 [ | 4.01 | 0.81 | 94.61% | 92.32% |
| GhostNet [ | 2.33 | 0.18 | 94.22% | 92.14% |
| Acne-RegNet | 2.31 |
Params: Parameters; Acc: Accuracy
Metadata information
| Name | Description | Possible values |
|---|---|---|
| Patient demographics | ||
| Age | The age of the patient. | A float value ranging from 10 to 60. |
| Sex | The sex of the patient. | One of: [Female ∣ Male ] |
| Ethnicity | The ethnicity of the patient. | 56 ethnic groups in China |
| History of the acne | ||
| Symptoms | The acne symptoms perceived by the patient. | A list of 5 symptoms (hardening , bleeding, increasing in size, itching, burning) with each symptom being one of: [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown]. |
| Duration | The time that the acne has persisted. | One of: [Two weeks ∣ Two to four weeks ∣ One month ∣ One to three months ∣ Three to six months ∣ More than six months ∣ Unknown] |
| Frequency | Frequency of occurrence of the skin disease. | One of: [Always ∣ Often ∣ Occasionally ∣ Unknown] |
| History of skin diseases | ||
| Personal history | Personal past history of skin diseases. | A list of four aspects of the personal history (skin cancer, melanoma, eczema, psoriasis) with each being one of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown]. |
| Family history | Family past history of skin diseases. | A list of four aspects of the family history (skin cancer, melanoma, eczema, psoriasis) with each being one of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown]. |
| Patient state | ||
| Allergy | Medications the patient is allergic to. | A list of 4 allergies (penicillin, cephalosporin, sulfa, nitroimidazole) with each being one of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown]. |
| Drug | If the patient is currently taking any medications. | One of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown] |
| Pregnancy | If the patient is pregnant. | One of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown] |
| Medical problem | If the patient currently has any medical problems. | One of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown] |
| Previous treatment state | ||
| Biopsy | If there has been a previous biopsy | One of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown] |
| Past medication | If the patient used medications for the skin problem. | One of [Yes ∣ No ∣ Unknown]. |
| Condition after treatments | Progression of the skin problem If the patient received treatment before. | One of: [Improved ∣ Worsened ∣ Unknown] |
Fig. 6Importance of different inputs to the proposed frame
Fig. 7Comparison with dermatologists (Derms), primary care physicians (PCPs), middle care physicians (MCPs) and nurse practitioners (NPs)
Comparison of methods used for acne severity assessment
| Reference | Method | Data | Criterion | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim et al. [ | (Inception v4,ResNet18) | 472 phone images | IGA | (67%,64%) |
| Yang et al. [ | Inception-v3 | 1957 camera images | Chinese guidelines | 80.00% |
| Nguyen et al. [ | Multi-task Learning | 1457 phone images | Hayashi criterion | 83.83% |
| Our method | Acne-RegNet | 4734 phone images | proposed criterion | 93.19% |
| Our method | Acne-RegNet | 4734 phone images | ||
| + Metadata | proposed criterion | 94.56% |
IGA:Investigator’s Global Assessment
Fig. 8Influence of interference sources: performance with different lighting conditions (a, b), different devices (c) and different skin tones (d)