Use of Artificial Intelligence as a Predictor of the Response to Treatment in Alopecia Areata
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged in dermatology with some studies focusing on skin disorders such as skin cancer, atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, and onychomycosis. Alopecia areata (AA) is a dermatological disease whose prevalence is 0.7%-3% in the United States, and is characterized by oval areas of nonscarring hair loss of the scalp or body without evident clinical variables to predict its response to the treatment. Nonetheless, some studies suggest a predictive value of trichoscopic features in the evaluation of treatment responses. Assuming that black dots, broken hairs, exclamation marks, and tapered hairs are markers of negative predictive value of the treatment response, while yellow dots are markers of no response to treatment according to recent studies, the absence of these trichoscopic features could indicate favorable disease evolution without treatment or even predict its response. Nonetheless, no studies have reportedly evaluated the role of AI in AA on the basis of trichoscopic features. Objective This study aimed to develop an AI algorithm to predict, using trichoscopic images, those patients diagnosed with AA with a better disease evolution. Methods In total, 80 trichoscopic images were included and classified in those with or without features of negative prognosis. Using a data augmentation technique, they were multiplied to 179 images to train an AI algorithm, as previously carried out with dermoscopic images of skin tumors with a favorable response. Subsequently, 82 new images of AA were presented to the algorithm, and the algorithm classified these patients as responders and non-responders; this process was reviewed by an expert trichologist observer and presented a concordance higher than 90% with the algorithm identifying structures described previously. Evolution of the cases was followed up to truly determine their response to treatment and, therefore, to assess the predictive value of the algorithm. Results In total, 32 of 40 (80%) images of patients predicted as nonresponders scarcely showed response to the treatment, while 34 of 42 (81%) images of those predicted as responders showed a favorable response to the treatment. Conclusions The development of an AI algorithm or tool could be useful to predict AA evolution and its response to treatment. However, further research is needed, including larger sample images or trained algorithms, by using images previously classified in accordance with the disease evolution and not with trichoscopic features. Conflicts of Interest None declared.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».