Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37338554›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2023

Fully automated segmentation and radiomics feature extraction of hypopharyngeal cancer on MRI using deep learning.

Yu-Chun Lin, Gigin Lin, Sumit Pandey, Chih-Hua Yeh, Jiun-Jie Wang, Chien-Yu Lin, Tsung-Ying Ho, Sheung-Fat Ko, Shu-Hang Ng

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
7.8field-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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yu-Chun Lin *Department of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, 5 Fuhsing St., Guishan, Taoyuan, 33382, Taiwan.
Gigin Lin *Department of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, 5 Fuhsing St., Guishan, Taoyuan, 33382, Taiwan.
Sumit PandeyDepartment of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, 5 Fuhsing St., Guishan, Taoyuan, 33382, Taiwan.
Chih-Hua YehDepartment of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, 5 Fuhsing St., Guishan, Taoyuan, 33382, Taiwan.
Jiun-Jie WangDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiological Sciences, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Chien-Yu LinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Tsung-Ying HoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Sheung-Fat KoDepartment of Radiology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Shu-Hang NgDepartment of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, 5 Fuhsing St., Guishan, Taoyuan, 33382, Taiwan. shuhangng@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1842-6179
Chang Gung University · TWChang Gung Memorial Hospital · TW

Funding

Taiwanese Ministry of Science and Technology MOST 109-2314-B-182A-045Taiwanese Ministry of Science and Technology MOST 110-2314-B-182A-090Taiwanese Ministry of Science and Technology MOST 111-2314-B-182A-041
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo use convolutional neural network for fully automated segmentation and radiomics features extraction of hypopharyngeal cancer (HPC) tumor in MRI.

methodsMR images were collected from 222 HPC patients, among them 178 patients were used for training, and another 44 patients were recruited for testing. U-Net and DeepLab V3 + architectures were used for training the models. The model performance was evaluated using the dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Jaccard index, and average surface distance. The reliability of radiomics parameters of the tumor extracted by the models was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

resultsThe predicted tumor volumes by DeepLab V3 + model and U-Net model were highly correlated with those delineated manually (p < 0.001). The DSC of DeepLab V3 + model was significantly higher than that of U-Net model (0.77 vs 0.75, p < 0.05), particularly in those small tumor volumes of < 10 cm

conclusionBoth DeepLab V3 + and U-Net models produced reasonable results in automated segmentation and radiomic features extraction of HPC on MR images, whereas DeepLab V3 + had a better performance than U-Net. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The deep learning model, DeepLab V3 + , exhibited promising performance in automated tumor segmentation and radiomics extraction for hypopharyngeal cancer on MRI. This approach holds great potential for enhancing the radiotherapy workflow and facilitating prediction of treatment outcomes. KEY POINTS: • DeepLab V3 + and U-Net models produced reasonable results in automated segmentation and radiomic features extraction of HPC on MR images. • DeepLab V3 + model was more accurate than U-Net in automated segmentation, especially on small tumors. • DeepLab V3 + exhibited higher agreement for about half of the first-order and shape-based radiomics features than U-Net.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHypopharyngeal NeoplasmsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsDeep learningHypopharyngeal cancerMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID37338554
PMCPMC10415433
OpenAlexW4381309300

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.