Feras Al-Obeidat, Wael Hafez, Asrar Rashid, Mahir Khalil Jallo, Munier Gador, Ivan Cherrez-Ojeda, Daniel Simancas-Racines
{"title":"急性髓系白血病显微血液图像的人工智能检测系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Feras Al-Obeidat, Wael Hafez, Asrar Rashid, Mahir Khalil Jallo, Munier Gador, Ivan Cherrez-Ojeda, Daniel Simancas-Racines","doi":"10.3389/fdata.2024.1402926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Leukemia is the 11<sup>th</sup> most prevalent type of cancer worldwide, with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) being the most frequent malignant blood malignancy in adults. Microscopic blood tests are the most common methods for identifying leukemia subtypes. An automated optical image-processing system using artificial intelligence (AI) has recently been applied to facilitate clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the performance of all AI-based approaches for the detection and diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical databases including PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched until December 2023. We used the \"metafor\" and \"metagen\" libraries in R to analyze the different models used in the studies. Accuracy and sensitivity were the primary outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies were included in our review and meta-analysis, conducted between 2016 and 2023. Most deep-learning models have been utilized, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The common- and random-effects models had accuracies of 1.0000 [0.9999; 1.0001] and 0.9557 [0.9312, and 0.9802], respectively. The common and random effects models had high sensitivity values of 1.0000 and 0.8581, respectively, indicating that the machine learning models in this study can accurately detect true-positive leukemia cases. Studies have shown substantial variations in accuracy and sensitivity, as shown by the Q values and I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our systematic review and meta-analysis found an overall high accuracy and sensitivity of AI models in correctly identifying true-positive AML cases. Future research should focus on unifying reporting methods and performance assessment metrics of AI-based diagnostics.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, CRD42024501980.</p>","PeriodicalId":52859,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Big Data","volume":"7 ","pages":"1402926"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782132/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence for the detection of acute myeloid leukemia from microscopic blood images; a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Feras Al-Obeidat, Wael Hafez, Asrar Rashid, Mahir Khalil Jallo, Munier Gador, Ivan Cherrez-Ojeda, Daniel Simancas-Racines\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fdata.2024.1402926\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Leukemia is the 11<sup>th</sup> most prevalent type of cancer worldwide, with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) being the most frequent malignant blood malignancy in adults. Microscopic blood tests are the most common methods for identifying leukemia subtypes. An automated optical image-processing system using artificial intelligence (AI) has recently been applied to facilitate clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the performance of all AI-based approaches for the detection and diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical databases including PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched until December 2023. We used the \\\"metafor\\\" and \\\"metagen\\\" libraries in R to analyze the different models used in the studies. Accuracy and sensitivity were the primary outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies were included in our review and meta-analysis, conducted between 2016 and 2023. Most deep-learning models have been utilized, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The common- and random-effects models had accuracies of 1.0000 [0.9999; 1.0001] and 0.9557 [0.9312, and 0.9802], respectively. The common and random effects models had high sensitivity values of 1.0000 and 0.8581, respectively, indicating that the machine learning models in this study can accurately detect true-positive leukemia cases. Studies have shown substantial variations in accuracy and sensitivity, as shown by the Q values and I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our systematic review and meta-analysis found an overall high accuracy and sensitivity of AI models in correctly identifying true-positive AML cases. Future research should focus on unifying reporting methods and performance assessment metrics of AI-based diagnostics.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, CRD42024501980.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Big Data\",\"volume\":\"7 \",\"pages\":\"1402926\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782132/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Big Data\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2024.1402926\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Big Data","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2024.1402926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:白血病是全球第11大流行的癌症类型,急性髓性白血病(AML)是成人中最常见的恶性血液恶性肿瘤。显微镜验血是鉴别白血病亚型最常用的方法。一种使用人工智能(AI)的自动光学图像处理系统最近被应用于促进临床决策。目的:评价各种基于人工智能的方法在急性髓性白血病(AML)检测和诊断中的性能。方法:检索PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus等医学数据库至2023年12月。我们使用R中的“metafor”和“metagen”库来分析研究中使用的不同模型。准确性和敏感性是主要的结局指标。结果:我们的综述和荟萃分析纳入了2016年至2023年间进行的10项研究。大多数深度学习模型已经被使用,包括卷积神经网络(cnn)。普通效应和随机效应模型的精度为1.0000 [0.9999;分别为1.0001和0.9557[0.9312,0.9802]。共同效应模型和随机效应模型的灵敏度值分别为1.0000和0.8581,表明本研究的机器学习模型能够准确检测出真阳性白血病病例。正如Q值和I2统计数据所示,研究表明准确性和灵敏度存在很大差异。结论:我们的系统回顾和荟萃分析发现,AI模型在正确识别真阳性AML病例方面具有较高的准确性和敏感性。未来的研究应着眼于统一人工智能诊断的报告方法和绩效评估指标。系统评价注册:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, CRD42024501980。
Artificial intelligence for the detection of acute myeloid leukemia from microscopic blood images; a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Leukemia is the 11th most prevalent type of cancer worldwide, with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) being the most frequent malignant blood malignancy in adults. Microscopic blood tests are the most common methods for identifying leukemia subtypes. An automated optical image-processing system using artificial intelligence (AI) has recently been applied to facilitate clinical decision-making.
Aim: To evaluate the performance of all AI-based approaches for the detection and diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).
Methods: Medical databases including PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched until December 2023. We used the "metafor" and "metagen" libraries in R to analyze the different models used in the studies. Accuracy and sensitivity were the primary outcome measures.
Results: Ten studies were included in our review and meta-analysis, conducted between 2016 and 2023. Most deep-learning models have been utilized, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The common- and random-effects models had accuracies of 1.0000 [0.9999; 1.0001] and 0.9557 [0.9312, and 0.9802], respectively. The common and random effects models had high sensitivity values of 1.0000 and 0.8581, respectively, indicating that the machine learning models in this study can accurately detect true-positive leukemia cases. Studies have shown substantial variations in accuracy and sensitivity, as shown by the Q values and I2 statistics.
Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis found an overall high accuracy and sensitivity of AI models in correctly identifying true-positive AML cases. Future research should focus on unifying reporting methods and performance assessment metrics of AI-based diagnostics.