Fully automated localization of prostate peripheral zone tumors on apparent diffusion coefficient map MR images using an ensemble learning method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate detection and localization of prostate cancer (PCa) in men undergoing prostate MRI is a fundamental step for future targeted prostate biopsies and treatment planning. Fully automated localization of peripheral zone (PZ) PCa using the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map might be clinically useful. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To describe automated localization of PCa in the PZ on ADC map MR images using an ensemble U-Net-based model. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective, case-control. POPULATION: In all, 226 patients (154 and 72 patients with and without clinically significant PZ PCa, respectively), training, and testing was performed using dataset images of 146 and 80 patients, respectively. FIELD STRENGTH: 3T, ADC maps. SEQUENCE: ADC map. ASSESSMENT: The ground truth was established by manual delineation of the prostate and prostate PZ tumors on ADC maps by dedicated radiologists using MRI-radical prostatectomy maps as a reference standard. Statistical Tests: Performance of the ensemble model was evaluated using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), sensitivity, and specificity metrics on a per-slice basis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC) were employed as well. The paired t-test was used to test the differences between the performances of constituent networks of the ensemble model. RESULTS: Our developed algorithm yielded DSC, sensitivity, and specificity of 86.72% ± 9.93%, 85.76% ± 23.33%, and 76.44% ± 23.70%, respectively (mean ± standard deviation) on 80 test cases consisting of 41 and 39 instances from patients with and without clinically significant tumors including 660 extracted 2D slices. AUC was reported as 0.779. DATA CONCLUSION: An ensemble U-Net-based approach can accurately detect and segment PCa in the PZ from ADC map MR prostate images. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1223-1234.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".