ArticleEJNMMI research2021
Repeatability of two semi-automatic artificial intelligence approaches for tumor segmentation in PET.
Article in EJNMMI research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comments on "Prognostic Significance of Pretreatment ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT Parameters in Patients With ER+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer Treated With CDK4/6 Inhibitors Plus Endocrine Therapy".Korean journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Impact of partial volume correction on radiomics reproducibility in theranostic SPECT/CT imaging.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Article
- A Thorough Review of the Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2025Review
- PET radiomics in lung cancer: advances and translational challenges.EJNMMI physics · 2024Review
- Topological state-space estimation of functional human brain networks.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Automated segmentation of lesions and organs at risk on [Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024Article
- Prognostic model using 18F-FDG PET radiomics predicts progression-free survival in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma.Blood advances · 2023Article
- A robust semi-automatic delineation workflow using denoised diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging for response assessment of patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- An Automatic Segmentation Method for Lung Tumor Based on Improved Region Growing Algorithm.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Convolutional neural networks for automatic image quality control and EARL compliance of PET images.EJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Early molecular imaging response assessment based on determination of total viable tumor burden in [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- An update on the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Automatic classification of lymphoma lesions in FDG-PET-Differentiation between tumor and non-tumor uptake.PloS one · 2022Article
- Automated liver lesion detection inEJNMMI research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) is routinely used for cancer staging and treatment follow-up. Metabolic active tumor volume (MATV) as well as total MATV (TMATV-including primary tumor, lymph nodes and metastasis) and/or total lesion glycolysis derived from PET images have been identified as prognostic factor or for the evaluation of treatment efficacy in cancer patients. To this end, a segmentation approach with high precision and repeatability is important. However, the implementation of a repeatable and accurate segmentation algorithm remains an ongoing challenge.
methodsIn this study, we compare two semi-automatic artificial intelligence (AI)-based segmentation methods with conventional semi-automatic segmentation approaches in terms of repeatability. One segmentation approach is based on a textural feature (TF) segmentation approach designed for accurate and repeatable segmentation of primary tumors and metastasis. Moreover, a convolutional neural network (CNN) is trained. The algorithms are trained, validated and tested using a lung cancer PET dataset. The segmentation accuracy of both segmentation approaches is compared using the Jaccard coefficient (JC). Additionally, the approaches are externally tested on a fully independent test-retest dataset. The repeatability of the methods is compared with those of two majority vote (MV2, MV3) approaches, 41%SUV
resultsThe accuracy of the segmentations with the reference segmentation was good (JC median TF: 0.7, CNN: 0.73). Both segmentation approaches outperformed most other conventional segmentation methods in terms of test-retest coefficient (TRT% mean: TF: 13.0%, CNN: 13.9%, MV2: 14.1%, MV3: 28.1%, 41%SUV
conclusionThe semi-automatic AI-based segmentation approaches used in this study provided better repeatability than conventional segmentation approaches. Moreover, both algorithms lead to accurate segmentations for both primary tumors as well as metastasis and are therefore good candidates for PET tumor segmentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.