Cargando…

Advancing prostate cancer detection: a comparative analysis of PCLDA-SVM and PCLDA-KNN classifiers for enhanced diagnostic accuracy

This investigation aimed to assess the effectiveness of different classification models in diagnosing prostate cancer using a screening dataset obtained from the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Data Access System. The dataset was first reduced using the PCLDA method, which combines Principal Comp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dubey, Priya, Kumar, Surendra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10447543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37612436
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40906-y
Descripción
Sumario:This investigation aimed to assess the effectiveness of different classification models in diagnosing prostate cancer using a screening dataset obtained from the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Data Access System. The dataset was first reduced using the PCLDA method, which combines Principal Component Analysis and Linear Discriminant Analysis. Two classifiers, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and k-Nearest Neighbour (KNN), were then applied to compare their performance. The results showed that the PCLDA-SVM model achieved an impressive accuracy rate of 97.99%, with a precision of 0.92, sensitivity of 92.83%, specificity of 97.65%, and F1 score of 0.93. Additionally, it demonstrated a low error rate of 0.016 and a Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) and Kappa coefficient of 0.946. On the other hand, the PCLDA-KNN model also performed well, achieving an accuracy of 97.8%, precision of 0.93, sensitivity of 93.39%, specificity of 97.86%, an F1 score of 0.92, a high MCC and Kappa coefficient of 0.98, and an error rate of 0.006. In conclusion, the PCLDA-SVM method exhibited improved efficacy in diagnosing prostate cancer compared to the PCLDA-KNN model. Both models, however, showed promising results, suggesting the potential of these classifiers in prostate cancer diagnosis.