Computer-Aided Detection (CADe) of Small Metastatic Prostate Cancer Lesions on 3D PSMA PET Volumes Using Multi-Angle Maximum Intensity Projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop and evaluate a novel computer-aided detection (CADe) approach for identifying small metastatic biochemically recurrent (BCR) prostate cancer (PCa) lesions on PSMA-PET images, utilizing multi-angle Maximum Intensity Projections (MA-MIPs) and state-of-the-art (SOTA) object detection algorithms. METHODS: We fine-tuned and evaluated 16 SOTA object detection algorithms (selected across four main categories of model types) applied to MA-MIPs as extracted from rotated 3D PSMA-PET volumes. Predicted 2D bounding boxes were back-projected to the original 3D space using the Ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) algorithm. A fine-tuned Medical Segment-Anything Model (MedSAM) was then also used to segment the identified lesions within the bounding boxes. RESULTS: The proposed method achieved a high detection performance for this difficult task, with the FreeAnchor model reaching an F1-score of 0.69 and a recall of 0.74. It outperformed several 3D methods in efficiency while maintaining comparable accuracy. Strong recall rates were observed for clinically relevant areas, such as local relapses (0.82) and bone metastases (0.80). CONCLUSION: Our fully automated CADe tool shows promise in assisting physicians as a "second reader" for detecting small metastatic BCR PCa lesions on PSMA-PET images. By leveraging the strength and computational efficiency of 2D models while preserving 3D spatial information of the PSMA-PET volume, the proposed approach has the potential to improve detectability and reduce workload in cancer diagnosis and management.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".