Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38291051›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Edge roughness quantifies impact of physician variation on training and performance of deep learning auto-segmentation models for the esophagus.

Yujie Yan, Christopher Kehayias, John He, Hugo J W L Aerts, Kelly J Fitzgerald, Benjamin H Kann, David E Kozono, Christian V Guthier, Raymond H Mak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Yujie YanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Christopher KehayiasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
John HeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Hugo J W L AertsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Kelly J FitzgeraldDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Benjamin H KannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
David E KozonoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Christian V GuthierDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Raymond H MakDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. rmak@partners.org.

Funding

The Boston Lung Cancer Survival CohortU01CA209414 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI David C Christiani · 2017 to 2026
$12.2M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA209414NIH HHS 5U01CA209414
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Manual segmentation of tumors and organs-at-risk (OAR) in 3D imaging for radiation-therapy planning is time-consuming and subject to variation between different observers. Artificial intelligence (AI) can assist with segmentation, but challenges exist in ensuring high-quality segmentation, especially for small, variable structures, such as the esophagus. We investigated the effect of variation in segmentation quality and style of physicians for training deep-learning models for esophagus segmentation and proposed a new metric, edge roughness, for evaluating/quantifying slice-to-slice inconsistency. This study includes a real-world cohort of 394 patients who each received radiation therapy (mainly for lung cancer). Segmentation of the esophagus was performed by 8 physicians as part of routine clinical care. We evaluated manual segmentation by comparing the length and edge roughness of segmentations among physicians to analyze inconsistencies. We trained eight multiple- and individual-physician segmentation models in total, based on U-Net architectures and residual backbones. We used the volumetric Dice coefficient to measure the performance for each model. We proposed a metric, edge roughness, to quantify the shift of segmentation among adjacent slices by calculating the curvature of edges of the 2D sagittal- and coronal-view projections. The auto-segmentation model trained on multiple physicians (MD1-7) achieved the highest mean Dice of 73.7 ± 14.8%. The individual-physician model (MD7) with the highest edge roughness (mean ± SD: 0.106 ± 0.016) demonstrated significantly lower volumetric Dice for test cases compared with other individual models (MD7: 58.5 ± 15.8%, MD6: 67.1 ± 16.8%, p < 0.001). A multiple-physician model trained after removing the MD7 data resulted in fewer outliers (e.g., Dice ≤ 40%: 4 cases for MD1-6, 7 cases for MD1-7, N

Indexed as

Deep LearningAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedThoraxTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID38291051
PMCPMC10827712

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.