# A Low-Cost and Portable Smart Instrumentation for Detecting Colorectal Cancer Cells
## 3 Results and Discussion
In order to evaluate the effectiveness/performance of the proposed device, we applied four measurement techniques that are commonly used in classification. These measurements include sensitivity, accuracy, specificity and precision, where sensitivity = TP/(TP + FN), accuracy = (TP + TN)/(TP + TN + FP + FN), specificity = TN/(TN + FP) and precision = TP/(TP + FP). As shown in Figure 8a, the fluorescence intensity is proportional to the number of cells. Figure 6: Flowchart showing the operating procedure of the device. Twenty-six samples (thirteen of cancer cell expressing IRFP702 and thirteen of control cell) were cultured on the glass slide with a confluency greater than 60%, and they were examined first with the Odyssey system and then with the developed prototype. Figure 8b shows the confusion matrix. As can be seen, the confusion matrix is the same as the confusion matrix, but the confusion matrix is the same as the confusion matrix. Figure 8: (**a**) Fluorescence intensity vs cell-number (**b**) Confusion matrix  
Figure 7: Results: (**a**) control colorectal cancer cell, (**b**) colorectal cancer cell expressing IRFP702 fluorophore, (**c**) control cell visualized with commercial system, (**d**) colorectal cancer cell expressing IRFP702 visualized with commercial system, and (**e**) reading on a waveform oscilloscope. be seen in Figure 8b, the proposed device was able to detect all of the control cells from the samples accurately. On the other hand, the fluorimeter detected 11 out of 13 cancer cells with IRFP702 correctly. The sensitivity, accuracy, specificity and precision were found out to be 0.85, 0.92, 1 and 1 respectively. Table 1 shows the list of major components that were used to build this device along with the individual and aggregate cost. The total cost of this device can further be reduced by using a low-cost filter which can provide similar accuracy. The presented device is again simplified with respect to a regular fluorescence microscope [7] as it eliminates the requirement of an additional dichroic mirror as well as excitation filter. Moreover, it is small in size, compact, costs less and is lightweight when compared to most commercial as well as research microscopes, as shown in Table 2. In addition to these advantages, removing the filter and camera also offers additional advantages, such as it eliminates the need of having to adjust light path settings and the external arc lamp. This device also obviates the need of having a filter cube in these devices to house the different set of filters. In addition, this device also removes the need for using expensive cameras. The sample chamber takes up a space of \(4\times 8\) cm which makes this experimental setup a perfect candidate for benchtop experiments. This device is user-friendly as the instruction is displayed on the LCD screen guiding the user for each step in the detection process. Alternatively, this developed device can also be connected via the serial port of a computer with a USB to enable control by the computer and hence control input and output operations via the computer through serial communication. We first tested the functionality of the developed fluorimeter by using it to detect fluorescence emitted from human colorectal cancer cells which were genetically engineered to express the fluorescence protein. These cultured cells functioned both as a biologically appropriate as well as technically convenient clinical proxy of colorectal cancer cells for the fluorescence-based selective-detection process. As proof of principle, the cultured colorectal cancer cells (with and without IRFP702) were imaged using a conventional Odyssey CLx imaging system obtained commercially from Odyssey and the same cultured cells (with and without IRFP702) were then tested with our developed prototype to validate the result.