Performance evaluation of machine learning-based infectious screening flags on the HORIBA Medical Yumizen H550 Haematology Analyzer for vivax malaria and dengue fever.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Child
Child, Preschool
Dengue
/ diagnosis
Dengue Virus
/ isolation & purification
Diagnostic Tests, Routine
/ statistics & numerical data
Female
Humans
India
Infant
Machine Learning
Malaria, Vivax
/ diagnosis
Male
Middle Aged
Parasitemia
/ diagnosis
Plasmodium vivax
/ isolation & purification
Sensitivity and Specificity
Young Adult
Journal
Malaria journal
ISSN: 1475-2875
Titre abrégé: Malar J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101139802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Nov 2020
23 Nov 2020
Historique:
received:
27
03
2020
accepted:
16
11
2020
entrez:
24
11
2020
pubmed:
25
11
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Automated detection of malaria and dengue infection has been actively researched for more than two decades. Although many improvements have been achieved, these solutions remain too expensive for most laboratories and clinics in developing countries. The low range HORIBA Medical Haematology Analyzer, Yumizen H550, now provides dedicated flags 'vivax malaria' and 'dengue fever' in routine blood testing, developed through machine learning methods, to be used as a screening tool for malaria and dengue fever in endemic areas. This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of these flags under real clinical conditions. A total of 1420 samples were tested using the Yumizen H550 Haematology Analyzer, including 1339 samples from febrile patients among whom 202 were infected with malaria parasites (Plasmodium vivax only: 182, Plasmodium falciparum only: 18, both: 2), 210 were from febrile dengue infected patients, 3 were from afebrile dengue infected patients and 78 were samples from healthy controls, in an outpatient laboratory clinic in Mumbai, India. Microscopic examination was carried out as the confirmatory reference method for detection of malarial parasite, species identification and assessing parasitaemia based on different stages of parasite life cycle. Rapid diagnostic malarial antigen tests were used for additional confirmation. For dengue infection, NS1 antigen detection by ELISA was used as a diagnostic marker. For the automated vivax malaria flag, the original manufacturer's cut off yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 65.2% and 98.9% respectively with the ROC AUC of 0.9. After optimization of cut-off value, flag performance improved to 72% for sensitivity and 97.9% specificity. Additionally it demonstrated a positive correlation with increasing levels of parasitaemia. For the automated dengue fever flag it yielded a ROC AUC of 0.82 with 79.3% sensitivity and 71.5% specificity. The results demonstrate a possibility of the effective use of automated infectious flags for screening vivax malaria and dengue infection in a clinical setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Automated detection of malaria and dengue infection has been actively researched for more than two decades. Although many improvements have been achieved, these solutions remain too expensive for most laboratories and clinics in developing countries. The low range HORIBA Medical Haematology Analyzer, Yumizen H550, now provides dedicated flags 'vivax malaria' and 'dengue fever' in routine blood testing, developed through machine learning methods, to be used as a screening tool for malaria and dengue fever in endemic areas. This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of these flags under real clinical conditions.
METHODS
METHODS
A total of 1420 samples were tested using the Yumizen H550 Haematology Analyzer, including 1339 samples from febrile patients among whom 202 were infected with malaria parasites (Plasmodium vivax only: 182, Plasmodium falciparum only: 18, both: 2), 210 were from febrile dengue infected patients, 3 were from afebrile dengue infected patients and 78 were samples from healthy controls, in an outpatient laboratory clinic in Mumbai, India. Microscopic examination was carried out as the confirmatory reference method for detection of malarial parasite, species identification and assessing parasitaemia based on different stages of parasite life cycle. Rapid diagnostic malarial antigen tests were used for additional confirmation. For dengue infection, NS1 antigen detection by ELISA was used as a diagnostic marker.
RESULTS
RESULTS
For the automated vivax malaria flag, the original manufacturer's cut off yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 65.2% and 98.9% respectively with the ROC AUC of 0.9. After optimization of cut-off value, flag performance improved to 72% for sensitivity and 97.9% specificity. Additionally it demonstrated a positive correlation with increasing levels of parasitaemia. For the automated dengue fever flag it yielded a ROC AUC of 0.82 with 79.3% sensitivity and 71.5% specificity.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The results demonstrate a possibility of the effective use of automated infectious flags for screening vivax malaria and dengue infection in a clinical setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33228680
doi: 10.1186/s12936-020-03502-3
pii: 10.1186/s12936-020-03502-3
pmc: PMC7684750
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
429Références
Parasitol Res. 1996;82(7):612-6
pubmed: 8875568
Acta Trop. 2019 May;193:7-11
pubmed: 30768978
Ann Hematol. 2004 May;83(5):313-5
pubmed: 15064860
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2010 Mar;82(3):412-4
pubmed: 20207865
Malar J. 2019 Jan 22;18(1):15
pubmed: 30670023
Malar J. 2019 Jul 31;18(1):262
pubmed: 31366365
Br J Haematol. 1999 Mar;104(3):499-503
pubmed: 10086786
J Infect Dis. 2004 Jan 15;189(2):190-4
pubmed: 14722882
Int J Lab Hematol. 2018 Jun;40(3):326-334
pubmed: 29464900
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2010 Aug 03;4(8):e769
pubmed: 20689812
Am J Clin Pathol. 1986 Sep;86(3):360-3
pubmed: 3529929
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2010 Mar;82(3):402-11
pubmed: 20207864
BMC Med. 2019 May 31;17(1):103
pubmed: 31146732
Ann Hematol. 2008 Sep;87(9):755-9
pubmed: 18427808
Int J Lab Hematol. 2014 Feb;36(1):45-55
pubmed: 23773224
Blood. 2002 Feb 1;99(3):1060-3
pubmed: 11807013
Malar J. 2018 Feb 02;17(1):59
pubmed: 29391022
Clin Microbiol Rev. 1990 Oct;3(4):376-96
pubmed: 2224837
Cytometry A. 2008 Jun;73(6):546-54
pubmed: 18302186
Cell. 2008 Jul 11;134(1):48-61
pubmed: 18614010
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2004 Sep;35(3):552-9
pubmed: 15689065
BMC Hematol. 2018 Aug 29;18:20
pubmed: 30181881
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2018 Nov 27;56(12):e284-e287
pubmed: 29813024
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Jan;53(1):167-71
pubmed: 25378575
PLoS One. 2014 May 13;9(5):e96981
pubmed: 24824542
Am J Clin Pathol. 2006 Nov;126(5):691-8
pubmed: 17050066
Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2019 Feb;67(1):27-40
pubmed: 30238127
Blood. 2014 Nov 27;124(23):3459-68
pubmed: 25139348
Int J Infect Dis. 2013 Jul;17(7):e490-3
pubmed: 23313156
Trop Med Int Health. 2008 Nov;13(11):1328-40
pubmed: 18803612
Malar Res Treat. 2010;2010:973094
pubmed: 22332025