Population-based prediction of subject-specific prostate deformation for MR-to-ultrasound image registration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statistical shape models of soft-tissue organ motion provide a useful means of imposing physical constraints on the displacements allowed during non-rigid image registration, and can be especially useful when registering sparse and/or noisy image data. In this paper, we describe a method for generating a subject-specific statistical shape model that captures prostate deformation for a new subject given independent population data on organ shape and deformation obtained from magnetic resonance (MR) images and biomechanical modelling of tissue deformation due to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) probe pressure. The characteristics of the models generated using this method are compared with corresponding models based on training data generated directly from subject-specific biomechanical simulations using a leave-one-out cross validation. The accuracy of registering MR and TRUS images of the prostate using the new prostate models was then estimated and compared with published results obtained in our earlier research. No statistically significant difference was found between the specificity and generalisation ability of prostate shape models generated using the two approaches. Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was found between the landmark-based target registration errors (TREs) following registration using different models, with a median (95th percentile) TRE of 2.40 (6.19) mm versus 2.42 (7.15) mm using models generated with the new method versus a model built directly from patient-specific biomechanical simulation data, respectively (N = 800; 8 patient datasets; 100 registrations per patient). We conclude that the proposed method provides a computationally efficient and clinically practical alternative to existing complex methods for modelling and predicting subject-specific prostate deformation, such as biomechanical simulations, for new subjects. The method may also prove useful for generating shape models for other organs, for example, where only limited shape training data from dynamic imaging is available.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".