4.2 Article

Characterization and automatic screening of reactive and abnormal neoplastic B lymphoid cells from peripheral blood

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ijlh.12473

关键词

Abnormal lymphoid cells; blood cells; digital image processing; automatic cell classification; peripheral blood; morphologic analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction The objective was to advance in the automatic, image-based, characterization and recognition of a heterogeneous set of lymphoid cells from peripheral blood, including normal, reactive, and five groups of abnormal lymphocytes: hairy cells, mantle cells, follicular lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and prolymphocytes. MethodsA number of 4389 images from 105 patients were selected by pathologists, based on morphologic visual appearance, from patients whose diagnosis was confirmed by all the remaining complementary tests. Besides geometry, new color and texture features were extracted using six alternative color spaces to obtain rich information to characterize the cell groups. The recognition system was designed using support vector machines trained with the whole image set. ResultsIn the experimental tests, individual sets of images from 21 new patients were analyzed by the trained recognition system and compared with the true diagnosis. An overall recognition accuracy of 97.67% was achieved when the cell screening was performed into three groups: normal lymphocytes, abnormal lymphoid cells, and reactive lymphocytes. The accuracy of the whole experimental study was 91.23% when considering the further discrimination of the abnormal lymphoid cells into the specific five groups. ConclusionThe excellent automatic screening of the three groups of normal, reactive, and abnormal lymphocytes is useful as it discriminates between malignancy and not malignancy. The discrimination of the five groups of abnormal lymphoid cells is encouraging toward the idea that the system could be an automated image-based screening method to identify blood involvement by a variety of B lymphomas.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据