Follow-up segmentation of lung tumors in PET and CT data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early response assessment of cancer therapy is a crucial component towards a more effective and patient individualized cancer therapy. Integrated PET/CT systems provide the opportunity to combine morphologic with functional information. We have developed algorithms which allow the user to track both tumor volume and standardized uptake value (SUV) measurements during the therapy from series of CT and PET images, respectively. To prepare for tumor volume estimation we have developed a new technique for a fast, flexible, and intuitive 3D definition of meshes. This initial surface is then automatically adapted by means of a model-based segmentation algorithm and propagated to each follow-up scan. If necessary, manual corrections can be added by the user. To determine SUV measurements a prioritized region growing algorithm is employed. For an improved workflow all algorithms are embedded in a PET/CT therapy monitoring software suite giving the clinician a unified and immediate access to all data sets. Whenever the user clicks on a tumor in a base-line scan, the courses of segmented tumor volumes and SUV measurements are automatically identified and displayed to the user as a graph plot. According to each course, the therapy progress can be classified as complete or partial response or as progressive or stable disease. We have tested our methods with series of PET/CT data from 9 lung cancer patients acquired at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto. Each patient underwent three PET/CT scans during a radiation therapy. Our results indicate that a combination of mean metabolic activity in the tumor with the PET-based tumor volume can lead to an earlier response detection than a purely volume based (CT diameter) or purely functional based (e.g. SUV max or SUV mean) response measures. The new software seems applicable for easy, faster, and reproducible quantification to routinely monitor tumor therapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".