Advertisement

Comparative study of multiclass classification methods on light microscopic images for hepatic schistosomiasis fibrosis diagnosis

  • Amira S. Ashour
  • Ahmed Refaat Hawas
  • Yanhui Guo
Research

Abstract

Hepatic schistosomiasis is a prolonged disease resulting mainly from the solvable egg antigen of schistosomiasis infection due to the host’s granulomatous cell-mediated immune. Irreversible fibrosis results from the progress of the schistosomal hepatopathy. Sensitive diagnosis of this disease is based on the investigation of the microscopy images, liver tissues, and egg identification. Early diagnosis of schistosomiasis at its initial infection stage is vital to avoid egg-induced irreparable pathological reactions. Typically, there are several classification approaches that can be used for liver fibrosis staging. However, it is unclear which approaches can achieve high accuracy for analyzing and intelligently classifying the liver microscopic images. Consequently, this work aims to study the performance of the different machine learning classifiers for accurate fibrosis level staging of granuloma, namely cellular, fibrocellular and fibrotic granulomas as well as the normal samples. The classifiers include a multi-layer perceptron neural network, a decision tree, discriminant analysis, support vector machine (SVM), nearest neighbor, and the ensemble of classifiers. The statistical features of the microscopic images are extracted from the different fibrosis levels of granuloma, namely cellular, fibrocellular and fibrotic granulomas as well as the normal samples. The results established that the maximum achieved classification accuracies of value 90% were achieved using the subspace discriminant ensemble, the quadratic SVM, the linear SVM, or the linear discriminant classifiers. However, the linear discriminant classifier can be considered the superior classifier as it realized the best area under the curve of value 0.96 during the classification of the cellular granuloma as well as the fibro-cellular granuloma fibrosis levels.

Keywords

Hepatic schistosomiasis Fibrosis Statistical features Ensemble classifier Decision tree Discriminant analysis Support vector machine Nearest neighbor 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors are thankful to Dr. Dalia Salah Ashour and Dr. Dina M. Abou Rayia, Department of Medical Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Egypt, for performing the parasitology part of the study and providing us with the used microscopic images dataset at the different fibrosis stages as well as the normal case.

References

  1. 1.
    Burke ML, Jones MK, Gobert GN, Li YS, Ellis MK, McManus DP. Immunopathogenesis of human schistosomiasis. Parasite Immunol. 2009;31(4):163–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lambertucci JR, Cota GF, Pinto-Silva RA, Serufo JC, Gerspacher-Lara R, Drummond SC, et al. Hepatosplenic schistosomiasis in field-based studies: a combined clinical and sonographic definition. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2001;96:147–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hotez PJ, Savioli L, Fenwick A. Neglected tropical diseases of the Middle East and North Africa: review of their prevalence, distribution, and opportunities for control. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(2):e1475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andrade ZDA. Schistosomiasis and liver fibrosis. Parasite Immunol. 2009;31(11):656–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gailhouste L, Le Grand Y, Odin C, Guyader D, Turlin B, Ezan F, et al. Fibrillar collagen scoring by second harmonic microscopy: a new tool in the assessment of liver fibrosis. J Hepatol. 2010;52(3):398–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mahmoud-Ghoneim D. Optimizing automated characterization of liver fibrosis histological images by investigating color spaces at different resolutions. Theor Biol Med Model. 2011;8(1):25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stanciu SG, Xu S, Peng Q, Yan J, Stanciu GA, Welsch RE, et al. Experimenting liver fibrosis diagnostic by two photon excitation microscopy and bag-of-features image classification. Sci Rep. 2014;4:4636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ali S, Smith KA. On learning algorithm selection for classification. Appl Soft Comput. 2006;6(2):119–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cinque L, De Santis A, Di Giamberardino P, Iacoviello D, Placidi G, Pompili S, et al. Design of a classification strategy for light microscopy images of the human liver. In: International conference on image analysis and processing. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 626–636.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mika S, Ratsch G, Weston J, Scholkopf B, Mullers K.R. Fisher discriminant analysis with kernels. In: Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE signal processing society workshop on neural networks for signal processing IX, 1999. p. 41–48.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dudoit S, Fridlyand J, Speed TP. Comparison of discrimination methods for the classification of tumors using gene expression data. J Am Stat Assoc. 2002;97(457):77–87.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. An introduction to statistical learning, vol. 112. New York: Springer; 2013.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuhn M, Johnson K. Applied predictive modeling, vol. 26. New York: Springer; 2013.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McLachlan G. Discriminant analysis and statistical pattern recognition, vol. 544. New York: Wiley; 2004.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Steinwart I, Christmann A. Support vector machines. New York: Springer; 2008.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duan KB, Keerthi SS. Which is the best multiclass SVM method? An empirical study. In: International workshop on multiple classifier systems. Berlin: Springer; 2005. p. 278–285Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boiman O, Shechtman E, Irani M. In defense of nearest-neighbor based image classification. In: IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2008. CVPR 2008. IEEE; 2008. p. 1–8.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Melgani F, Bruzzone L. Classification of hyperspectral remote sensing images with support vector machines. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens. 2004;42(8):1778–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sarkaleh AK, Poorahangaryan F, Zanj B, Karami A. A neural network based system for Persian sign language recognition. In: 2009 IEEE international conference on signal and image processing applications (ICSIPA). IEEE; 2009. p. 145–149Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dietterich T.G. Ensemble methods in machine learning. In: International workshop on multiple classifier systems. Berlin: Springer; 2000. p. 1–15Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kuncheva LI, Rodríguez JJ, Plumpton CO, Linden DE, Johnston SJ. Random subspace ensembles for fMRI classification. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010;29(2):531–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fraz MM, Remagnino P, Hoppe A, Uyyanonvara B, Rudnicka AR, Owen CG, Barman SA. An ensemble classification-based approach applied to retinal blood vessel segmentation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2012;59(9):2538–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Panahi N, Shayesteh MG, Mihandoost S, Varghahan BZ. Recognition of different datasets using PCA, LDA, and various classifiers. In: 2011 5th international conference on application of information and communication technologies (AICT). IEEE; 2011. pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    El-Naqa I, Yang Y, Wernick MN, Galatsanos NP, Nishikawa RM. A support vector machine approach for detection of microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2002;21(12):1552–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Electrical Communication Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringTanta UniversityTantaEgypt
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Illinois at SpringfieldSpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations