MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597156741 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aa66bf

Iterative framework for the joint segmentation and CT synthesis of MR images: application to MRI-only radiotherapy treatment planning

2017· article· en· W2597156741 on OpenAlexaff
Ninon Burgos, Filipa Guerreiro, Jamie R. McClelland, Benoît Presles, Marc Modat, Simeon Nill, David P. Dearnaley, Nandita M. deSouza, Uwe Oelfke, Antje Knopf, Sébastien Ourselin, M. Jorge Cardoso

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
FundersNIHR Sheffield Biomedical Research CentreNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustCancer Research UK
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)Magnetic resonance imagingSegmentationRadiation treatment planningComputer scienceRadiation therapyArtificial intelligenceComputed tomographyComputer visionImage registrationNuclear medicineRadiologyMedicineImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To tackle the problem of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP), we propose a multi-atlas information propagation scheme that jointly segments organs and generates pseudo x-ray computed tomography (CT) data from structural MR images (T1-weighted and T2-weighted). As the performance of the method strongly depends on the quality of the atlas database composed of multiple sets of aligned MR, CT and segmented images, we also propose a robust way of registering atlas MR and CT images, which combines structure-guided registration, and CT and MR image synthesis. We first evaluated the proposed framework in terms of segmentation and CT synthesis accuracy on 15 subjects with prostate cancer. The segmentations obtained with the proposed method were compared using the Dice score coefficient (DSC) to the manual segmentations. Mean DSCs of 0.73, 0.90, 0.77 and 0.90 were obtained for the prostate, bladder, rectum and femur heads, respectively. The mean absolute error (MAE) and the mean error (ME) were computed between the reference CTs (non-rigidly aligned to the MRs) and the pseudo CTs generated with the proposed method. The MAE was on average HU and the ME HU. We then performed a dosimetric evaluation by re-calculating plans on the pseudo CTs and comparing them to the plans optimised on the reference CTs. We compared the cumulative dose volume histograms (DVH) obtained for the pseudo CTs to the DVH obtained for the reference CTs in the planning target volume (PTV) located in the prostate, and in the organs at risk at different DVH points. We obtained average differences of in the PTV for , and between and 0.05% in the PTV, bladder, rectum and femur heads for D mean and . Overall, we demonstrate that the proposed framework is able to automatically generate accurate pseudo CT images and segmentations in the pelvic region, potentially bypassing the need for CT scan for accurate RTP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.170
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207