Comparative evaluation of spectroscopic models using different multivariate statistical tools in a multicancer scenario.

Cancer is now recognized as one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality. Histopathological diagnosis, the gold standard, is shown to be subjective, time consuming, prone to interobserver disagreement, and often fails to predict prognosis. Optical spectroscopic methods are being contemplated as adjuncts or alternatives to conventional cancer diagnostics. The most important aspect of these approaches is their objectivity, and multivariate statistical tools play a major role in realizing it. However, rigorous evaluation of the robustness of spectral models is a prerequisite. The utility of Raman spectroscopy in the diagnosis of cancers has been well established. Until now, the specificity and applicability of spectral models have been evaluated for specific cancer types. In this study, we have evaluated the utility of spectroscopic models representing normal and malignant tissues of the breast, cervix, colon, larynx, and oral cavity in a broader perspective, using different multivariate tests. The limit test, which was used in our earlier study, gave high sensitivity but suffered from poor specificity. The performance of other methods such as factorial discriminant analysis and partial least square discriminant analysis are at par with more complex nonlinear methods such as decision trees, but they provide very little information about the classification model. This comparative study thus demonstrates not just the efficacy of Raman spectroscopic models but also the applicability and limitations of different multivariate tools for discrimination under complex conditions such as the multicancer scenario.