MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415593673 · doi:10.1109/trpms.2025.3625611

Comprehensive Evaluation of Quantitative Measurements From Automated Deep Segmentations of PSMA PET/CT Images

2025· article· W4415593673 on OpenAlexafffund
Obed Korshie Dzikunu, Shadab Ahamed, Sara Harsini, François Bénard, Xiaoxiao Li, Arman Rahmim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiceGround truthConcordance correlation coefficientSegmentationSørensen–Dice coefficientPattern recognition (psychology)ConcordanceCorrelation coefficient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study performs a comprehensive evaluation of quantitative measurements as extracted from automated deep-learning-based segmentation methods, beyond traditional Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) assessments, focusing on six quantitative metrics, namely SUVmax, SUVmean, total lesion activity (TLA), tumor volume (TMTV), lesion count, and lesion spread. We analyzed 380 prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) targeted 18FDCFPyL PET/CT scans of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer, training deep neural networks, U-Net, Attention U-Net and SegResNet with four loss functions: Dice Loss, Dice Cross Entropy, Dice Focal Loss, and our proposed L1 weighted Dice Focal Loss (L1DFL). Evaluations indicated that Attention U-Net paired with L1DFL achieved the strongest correlation with the ground truth (Lin’s concordance correlation = 0.90–0.99 for SUVmax and TLA), whereas models employing the Dice Loss and the other two compound losses, particularly with SegResNet, underperformed. Equivalence testing (TOST, α = 0.05, = 20%) confirmed high performance for SUV metrics, lesion count and TLA, with L1DFL yielding the best performance. By contrast, tumor volume and lesion spread exhibited greater variability. Bland-Altman, Coverage Probability, and Total Deviation Index analyses further highlighted that our proposed L1DFL minimizes variability in quantification of the ground truth clinical measures. However, differences in DSC across the various loss functions did not reach statistical significance based on p-value analysis. The code is publicly available at: https://github.com/ObedDzik/pca_segment.git.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical SciencesSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207