MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automatic segmentation of prostate cancer metastases in PSMA PET/CT images using deep neural networks with weighted batch-wise dice loss

2023· article· en· W4362531944 on OpenAlexafffund
Yixi Xu, Ivan S. Klyuzhin, Sara Harsini, Anthony Ortiz, Shun Zhang, François Bénard, Rahul Dodhia, Carlos Uribe, Arman Rahmim, Juan Lavista Ferres

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers in Biology and Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaMitacsMicrosoft
KeywordsDiceProstate cancerSegmentationSørensen–Dice coefficientConvolutional neural networkContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)ProstateArtificial neural networkNuclear medicineImage segmentationMedicineCancerInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Automatic and accurate segmentation of lesions in images of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer has the potential to enable personalized radiopharmaceutical therapy and advanced treatment response monitoring. The aim of this study is to develop a convolutional neural networks-based framework for fully-automated detection and segmentation of metastatic prostate cancer lesions in whole-body PET/CT images. METHODS: F]DCFPyL radiotracer that targets prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). U-Net (1)-based convolutional neural networks (CNNs) were trained to identify lesions on paired axial PET/CT slices. Baseline models were trained using batch-wise dice loss, as well as the proposed weighted batch-wise dice loss (wDice), and the lesion detection performance was quantified, with a particular emphasis on lesion size, intensity, and location. We used 418 images for model training, 30 for model validation, and 77 for model testing. In addition, we allowed our model to take n = 0,2, …, 12 neighboring axial slices to examine how incorporating greater amounts of 3D context influences model performance. We selected the optimal number of neighboring axial slices that maximized the detection rate on the 30 validation images, and trained five neural networks with different architectures. RESULTS: Model performance was evaluated using the detection rate, Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and sensitivity. We found that the proposed wDice loss significantly improved the lesion detection rate, lesion-wise DSC and lesion-wise sensitivity compared to the baseline, with corresponding average increases of 0.07 (p-value = 0.01), 0.03 (p-value = 0.01) and 0.04 (p-value = 0.01), respectively. The inclusion of the first two neighboring axial slices in the input likewise increased the detection rate by 0.17, lesion-wise DSC by 0.05, and lesion-wise mean sensitivity by 0.16. However, there was a minimal effect from including more distant neighboring slices. We ultimately chose to use a number of neighboring slices equal to 2 and the wDice loss function to train our final model. To evaluate the model's performance, we trained three models using identical hyperparameters on three different data splits. The results showed that, on average, the model was able to detect 80% of all testing lesions, with a detection rate of 93% for lesions with maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) greater than 5.0. In addition, the average median lesion-wise DSC was 0.51 and 0.60 for all the lesions and lesions with SUVmax>5.0, respectively, on the testing set. Four additional neural networks with different architectures were trained, and they both yielded stronger performance of segmenting lesions whose SUVmax>5.0 compared to the rest of lesions. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that prostate cancer metastases in PSMA PET/CT images can be detected and segmented using CNNs. The segmentation performance strongly depends on the intensity, size, and the location of lesions, and can be improved by using specialized loss functions. Specifically, the models performed best in detection of lesions with SUVmax>5.0. Another challenge was to accurately segment lesions close to the bladder. Future work will focus on improving the detection of lesions with lower SUV values by designing custom loss functions that take into account the lesion intensity, using additional data augmentation techniques, and reducing the number of false lesions by developing methods to better separate signal from noise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers in Biology and MedicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207