Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35110676›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Deep learning-based segmentation of the thorax in mouse micro-CT scans.

Justin Malimban, Danny Lathouwers, Haibin Qian, Frank Verhaegen, Julia Wiedemann, Sytze Brandenburg, Marius Staring

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Justin MalimbanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. j.malimban@umcg.nl.
Danny LathouwersDepartment of Radiation Science and Technology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, 2629 JB, Delft, The Netherlands.
Haibin QianDepartment of Medical Biology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (Location AMC) and Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Frank VerhaegenDepartment of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, 6229 ER, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Julia WiedemannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Sytze Brandenburg *Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marius Staring *Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDelft University of Technology · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLMaastro Clinic · NLUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For image-guided small animal irradiations, the whole workflow of imaging, organ contouring, irradiation planning, and delivery is typically performed in a single session requiring continuous administration of anaesthetic agents. Automating contouring leads to a faster workflow, which limits exposure to anaesthesia and thereby, reducing its impact on experimental results and on animal wellbeing. Here, we trained the 2D and 3D U-Net architectures of no-new-Net (nnU-Net) for autocontouring of the thorax in mouse micro-CT images. We trained the models only on native CTs and evaluated their performance using an independent testing dataset (i.e., native CTs not included in the training and validation). Unlike previous studies, we also tested the model performance on an external dataset (i.e., contrast-enhanced CTs) to see how well they predict on CTs completely different from what they were trained on. We also assessed the interobserver variability using the generalized conformity index ([Formula: see text]) among three observers, providing a stronger human baseline for evaluating automated contours than previous studies. Lastly, we showed the benefit on the contouring time compared to manual contouring. The results show that 3D models of nnU-Net achieve superior segmentation accuracy and are more robust to unseen data than 2D models. For all target organs, the mean surface distance (MSD) and the Hausdorff distance (95p HD) of the best performing model for this task (nnU-Net 3d_fullres) are within 0.16 mm and 0.60 mm, respectively. These values are below the minimum required contouring accuracy of 1 mm for small animal irradiations, and improve significantly upon state-of-the-art 2D U-Net-based AIMOS method. Moreover, the conformity indices of the 3d_fullres model also compare favourably to the interobserver variability for all target organs, whereas the 2D models perform poorly in this regard. Importantly, the 3d_fullres model offers 98% reduction in contouring time.

Indexed as

Deep LearningRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRadiography, ThoracicX-Ray MicrotomographyAnimalsFemaleMiceMice, Inbred BALB CObserver VariationPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsThoraxWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID35110676
PMCPMC8810936
OpenAlexW4210336320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.