Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34315148›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2021

Automatic segmentation of brain metastases using T1 magnetic resonance and computed tomography images.

Dylan G Hsu, Åse Ballangrud, Achraf Shamseddine, Joseph O Deasy, Harini Veeraraghavan, Laura Cervino, Kathryn Beal, Michalis Aristophanous

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Deep learning in MRI-guided radiation therapy: A systematic review.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Dylan G HsuDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9045-5049
Åse BallangrudDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.
Achraf ShamseddineDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.
Joseph O DeasyDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.
Harini VeeraraghavanDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4054-5529
Laura CervinoDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.
Kathryn BealDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.
Michalis AristophanousDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An increasing number of patients with multiple brain metastases are being treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Manually identifying and contouring all metastatic lesions is difficult and time-consuming, and a potential source of variability. Hence, we developed a 3D deep learning approach for segmenting brain metastases on MR and CT images. Five-hundred eleven patients treated with SRS were retrospectively identified for this study. Prior to radiotherapy, the patients were imaged with 3D T1 spoiled-gradient MR post-Gd (T1 + C) and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), which were co-registered by a treatment planner. The gross tumor volume contours, authored by the attending radiation oncologist, were taken as the ground truth. There were 3 ± 4 metastases per patient, with volume up to 57 ml. We produced a multi-stage model that automatically performs brain extraction, followed by detection and segmentation of brain metastases using co-registered T1 + C and CECT. Augmented data from 80% of these patients were used to train modified 3D V-Net convolutional neural networks for this task. We combined a normalized boundary loss function with soft Dice loss to improve the model optimization, and employed gradient accumulation to stabilize the training. The average Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for brain extraction was 0.975 ± 0.002 (95% CI). The detection sensitivity per metastasis was 90% (329/367), with moderate dependence on metastasis size. Averaged across 102 test patients, our approach had metastasis detection sensitivity 95 ± 3%, 2.4 ± 0.5 false positives, DSC of 0.76 ± 0.03, and 95th-percentile Hausdorff distance of 2.5 ± 0.3 mm (95% CIs). The volumes of automatic and manual segmentations were strongly correlated for metastases of volume up to 20 ml (r=0.97,p<0.001). This work expounds a fully 3D deep learning approach capable of automatically detecting and segmenting brain metastases using co-registered T1 + C and CECT.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsAutomationHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyRadiosurgeryRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray Computedboundary lossbrain metastasesCECTconvolutional neural networkdeep learningMRIskull stripping

Identifiers

PMID34315148
PMCPMC9345139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.