Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35602548›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2022

Semi-automatic tumor segmentation of rectal cancer based on functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Franziska Knuth, Aurora R Groendahl, René M Winter, Turid Torheim, Anne Negård, Stein Harald Holmedal, Kine Mari Bakke, Sebastian Meltzer, Cecilia M Futsæther, Kathrine R Redalen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Franziska KnuthDepartment of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Høgskoleringen 5, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Aurora R GroendahlFaculty of Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Drøbakveien 31, 1432 Ås, Norway.
René M WinterDepartment of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Høgskoleringen 5, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Turid TorheimDepartment of Informatics, University of Oslo, Gaustadalléen 23 B, 0373 Oslo, Norway.
Anne NegårdDepartment of Radiology, Akershus University Hospital, Sykehusveien 25, 1478 Nordbyhagen, Norway.
Stein Harald HolmedalDepartment of Radiology, Akershus University Hospital, Sykehusveien 25, 1478 Nordbyhagen, Norway.
Kine Mari BakkeInstitute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Kirkeveien 166, 0450 Oslo, Norway.
Sebastian MeltzerDepartment of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Sykehusveien 25, 1478 Nordbyhagen, Norway.
Cecilia M FutsætherFaculty of Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Drøbakveien 31, 1432 Ås, Norway.
Kathrine R RedalenDepartment of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Høgskoleringen 5, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Tumor delineation is required both for radiotherapy planning and quantitative imaging biomarker purposes. It is a manual, time- and labor-intensive process prone to inter- and intraobserver variations. Semi or fully automatic segmentation could provide better efficiency and consistency. This study aimed to investigate the influence of including and combining functional with anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences on the quality of automatic segmentations. Materials and methods: T2-weighted (T2w), diffusion weighted, multi-echo T2*-weighted, and contrast enhanced dynamic multi-echo (DME) MR images of eighty-one patients with rectal cancer were used in the analysis. Four classical machine learning algorithms; adaptive boosting (ADA), linear and quadratic discriminant analysis and support vector machines, were trained for automatic segmentation of tumor and normal tissue using different combinations of the MR images as input, followed by semi-automatic morphological post-processing. Manual delineations from two experts served as ground truth. The Sørensen-Dice similarity coefficient (DICE) and mean symmetric surface distance (MSD) were used as performance metric in leave-one-out cross validation. Results: Using T2w images alone, ADA outperformed the other algorithms, yielding a median per patient DICE of 0.67 and MSD of 3.6 mm. The performance improved when functional images were added and was highest for models based on either T2w and DME images (DICE: 0.72, MSD: 2.7 mm) or all four MRI sequences (DICE: 0.72, MSD: 2.5 mm). Conclusion: Machine learning models using functional MRI, in particular DME, have the potential to improve automatic segmentation of rectal cancer relative to models using T2w MRI alone.

Indexed as

ADA, Adaptive boostingDICE, Sørensen-Dice similarity coefficientDME, Dynamic multi echoDW, Diffusion weightedIQR, Interquartile rangeLDA, Linear discriminant analysisMED, MedianMRI, Magnetic resonance imagingMSD, Mean symmetric surface distanceQDA, Quadratic discriminant analysisSVM, Support vector machines

Identifiers

PMID35602548
PMCPMC9114680

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.