A Search for Machinery Intelligence Towards Sustainable Health : An Improved Ensemble Cervical Cancer Diagnosis
Keywords:
Machine Learning Algorithms, Classifiers, Cervical Cancer, Ensemble Classification.Abstract
Health professionals identify cervical cancer as a potentially fatal condition. Patients' valuable lives are at risk due to the difficult late diagnosis and treatment. The formal screening for illness identification suffers in both developed and developing countries because of high medical costs, a lack of healthcare facilities, social norms, and the late onset of symptoms. Early detection of various different illnesses, including cervical cancer, is possible because to machine intelligence. It is also cost-effective and computationally cheap. Modern, time-consuming medical treatments are not necessary for the patients, and machine intelligence can help with early cervical cancer detection. The reliance on a single classifier's prediction accuracy is the issue with the present machine classification approaches for illness detection. Due to bias, over-fitting, improper treatment of noisy data, and outliers, the use of a single classification method does not guarantee the best prediction. In order to provide an appropriate diagnosis that addresses the patient's symptoms or problems, this research study presents an ensemble classification approach based on majority voting. A broad variety of classifiers, including Decision Tree (DT), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Naive Bayes (NB), Multiple Perceptron (MP), and Logistic Regression (LR) classifiers, are experimented in the study. The study shows an increase in prediction accuracy of 94%, which is much higher than the prediction accuracies of individual classification methods tested on the same benchmarked datasets. As a result, the suggested paradigm offers health professionals access to a second opinion for early illness detection and treatment.
References
- N. Qiu, X. Li, and J. Liu, ‘‘Application of cyclodextrins in cancer treatment,’’ J. Inclusion Phenomena Macrocyclic Chem., vol. 89, nos. 3–4, pp. 229–246, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s10847-017-0752-2.
- L. Schwartz, C. Supuran, and K. Alfarouk, ‘‘The warburg effect and the hallmarks of cancer,’’ Anti-Cancer Agents Med. Chem., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 164–170, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.2174/1871520616666161031143301.
- E. M. Hassan and M. C. DeRosa, ‘‘Recent advances in cancer early detection and diagnosis: Role of nucleic acid based aptasensors,’’ TrAC Trends Anal. Chem., vol. 124, Mar. 2020, Art. no. 115806, doi: 10.1016/j.trac.2020.115806.
- N. A. Parmin, U. Hashim, S. C. B. Gopinath, S. Nadzirah, Z. Rejali, A. Afzan, and M. N. A. Uda, ‘‘Human papillomavirus e6 biosensing: Current progression on early detection strategies for cervical cancer,’’ Int. J. Biol. Macromolecules, vol. 126, pp. 877–890, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.12.235.
- T. A. Kessler, ‘‘Cervical cancer: Prevention and early detection,’’ Seminars Oncol. Nursing, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 172–183, May 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.soncn.2017.02.005.
- N. Wentzensen and M. von Knebel Doeberitz, ‘‘Biomarkers in cervical cancer screening,’’ Disease Markers, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 315–330, 2007, doi: 10.1155/2007/678793.
- C. J. Meijer, P. J. Snijders, and P. E. Castle, ‘‘Clinical utility of HPV genotyping,’’ Gynecol. Oncol., vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 12–17, Oct. 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.07.031.
- H. N. Luu, K. R. Dahlstrom, P. D. Mullen, H. M. Vonville, and M. E. Scheurer, ‘‘Comparison of the accuracy of hybrid capture II and polymerase chain reaction in detecting clinically important cervical dysplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis,’’ Cancer Med., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 367–390, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1002/cam4.83.
- H. N. Luu, K. Adler-Storthz, L. M. Dillon, M. Follen, and M. E. Scheurer, ‘‘Comparing the performance of hybrid capture II and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the identification of cervical dysplasia in the screening and diagnostic settings,’’ Clin. Med. Insights, Oncol., vol. 7, Jan. 2013, Art. no. CMO.S12811, doi: 10.4137/CMO.S12811.
- T. A. Brown, ‘‘Southern blotting and related DNA detection techniques,’’ in Encyclopedia of Life Sciences. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2001.
- Q. Wang, B. Zhang, X. Lin, and W. Weng, ‘‘Hybridization biosensor based on the covalent immobilization of probe DNA on chitosan–mutiwalled carbon nanotubes nanocomposite by using glutaraldehyde as an arm linker,’’ Sens. Actuators B, Chem., vol. 156, no. 2, pp. 599–605, Aug. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2011.02.004. 12386 VOLUME 9, 2021 Q. M. Ilyas, M. Ahmad: Enhanced Ensemble Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer: A Pursuit of Machine Intelligence
- N. Zari, A. Amine, and M. M. Ennaji, ‘‘Label-free DNA biosensor for electrochemical detection of short DNA sequences related to human papilloma virus,’’ Anal. Lett., vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 519–535, Feb. 2009, doi: 10.1080/00032710802421897.
- H. C. Kitchener, K. Canfell, C. Gilham, A. Sargent, C. Roberts, M. Desai, and J. Peto, ‘‘The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary human papillomavirus cervical screening in england: Extended follow-up of the ARTISTIC randomised trial cohort through three screening rounds,’’ Health Technol. Assessment, vol. 18, no. 23, p. 1, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.3310/hta18230.
- J. Hoebeeck, F. Speleman, and J. Vandesompele, ‘‘Real-time quantitative PCR as an alternative to southern blot or fluorescence in situ hybridization for detection of gene copy number changes,’’ in Protocols for Nucleic Acid Analysis by Nonradioactive Probes, vol. 353. Totowa, NJ, USA: Humana Press Inc., 2007, ch. 15, pp. 205–226, doi: 10.1385/1-59745-229-7:205.
- F. Şahiner, A. Kubar, R. Gümral, M. Ardıç, N. Yiğit, K. Şener, M. Dede, and M. Yapar, ‘‘Efficiency of MY09/11 consensus PCR in the detection of multiple HPV infections,’’ Diagnostic Microbiol. Infectious Disease, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 43–49, Sep. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2014.03.030.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) IJSRCSEIT

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.