MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939917862 · doi:10.1002/mp.13550

Automated segmentation of prostate zonal anatomy on T2‐weighted (T2W) and apparent diffusion coefficient (<scp>ADC</scp>) map <scp>MR</scp> images using U‐Nets

2019· article· en· W2939917862 on OpenAlexafffund
Fatemeh Zabihollahy, Nicola Schieda, Eranga Ukwatta

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEffective diffusion coefficientDiffusion MRIT2 weightedSegmentationProstateMagnetic resonance imagingMultiparametric MRINuclear medicineMedicineNuclear magnetic resonanceArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Accurate regional segmentation of the prostate boundaries on magnetic resonance (MR) images is a fundamental requirement before automated prostate cancer diagnosis can be achieved. In this paper, we describe a novel methodology to segment prostate whole gland (WG), central gland (CG), and peripheral zone (PZ), where PZ + CG = WG, from T2W and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map prostate MR images. METHODS: We designed two similar models each made up of two U-Nets to delineate the WG, CG, and PZ from T2W and ADC map MR images, separately. The U-Net, which is a modified version of a fully convolutional neural network, includes contracting and expanding paths with convolutional, pooling, and upsampling layers. Pooling and upsampling layers help to capture and localize image features with a high spatial consistency. We used a dataset consisting of 225 patients (combining 153 and 72 patients with and without clinically significant prostate cancer) imaged with multiparametric MRI at 3 Tesla. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Our proposed model for prostate zonal segmentation from T2W was trained and tested using 1154 and 1587 slices of 100 and 125 patients, respectively. Median of Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) on test dataset for prostate WG, CG, and PZ were 95.33 ± 7.77%, 93.75 ± 8.91%, and 86.78 ± 3.72%, respectively. Designed model for regional prostate delineation from ADC map images was trained and validated using 812 and 917 slices from 100 and 125 patients. This model yielded a median DSC of 92.09 ± 8.89%, 89.89 ± 10.69%, and 86.1 ± 9.56% for prostate WG, CG, and PZ on test samples, respectively. Further investigation indicated that the proposed algorithm reported high DSC for prostate WG segmentation from both T2W and ADC map MR images irrespective of WG size. In addition, segmentation accuracy in terms of DSC does not significantly vary among patients with or without significant tumors. SIGNIFICANCE: We describe a method for automated prostate zonal segmentation using T2W and ADC map MR images independent of prostate size and the presence or absence of tumor. Our results are important in terms of clinical perspective as fully automated methods for ADC map images, which are considered as one of the most important sequences for prostate cancer detection in the PZ and CG, have not been reported previously.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations61
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207