Auto-segmentation of the parotid glands on MR images of head and neck cancer patients with deep learning strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Adaptive online MRI-guided radiotherapy of head and neck cancer requires the reliable segmentation of the parotid glands as important organs at risk in clinically acceptable time frames. This can hardly be achieved by manual contouring. We therefore designed deep learning-based algorithms which automatically perform this task. Imaging data comprised two datasets: 27 patient MR images (T1-weighted and T2-weighted) and eight healthy volunteer MR images (T2-weighted), together with manually drawn contours by an expert. We used four different convolutional neural network (CNN) designs that each processed the data differently, varying the dimensionality of the input. We assessed the segmentation accuracy calculating the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD) and mean surface distance (MSD) between manual and auto-generated contours. We benchmarked the developed methods by comparing to the inter-observer variability and to atlas-based segmentation. Additionally, we assessed the generalisability, strengths and limitations of deep learning-based compared to atlas-based methods in the independent volunteer test dataset. With a mean DSC of 0.85 ± 0.11 and mean MSD of 1.82 ± 1.94 mm, a 2D CNN could achieve an accuracy comparable to that of an atlas-based method (DSC: 0.85 ± 0.05, MSD: 1.67 ± 1.21 mm) and the inter-observer variability (DSC: 0.84 ± 0.06, MSD: 1.50 ± 0.77 mm) but considerably faster (<1s v.s. 45 min). Adding information (adjacent slices, fully 3D or multi-modality) did not further improve the accuracy. With additional preprocessing steps, the 2D CNN was able to generalise well for the fully independent volunteer dataset (DSC: 0.79 ± 0.10, MSD: 1.72 ± 0.96 mm) We demonstrated the enormous potential for the application of CNNs to segment the parotid glands for online MRI-guided radiotherapy. The short computation times render deep learning-based methods suitable for online treatment planning workflows.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".