ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2024
Auto-segmentation of Adult-Type Diffuse Gliomas: Comparison of Transfer Learning-Based Convolutional Neural Network Model vs. Radiologists.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Brain Gliomas.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Comparative analysis of deep learning and radiomic signatures for overall survival prediction in recurrent high-grade glioma treated with immunotherapy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Segmentation of glioma is crucial for quantitative brain tumor assessment, to guide therapeutic research and clinical management, but very time-consuming. Fully automated tools for the segmentation of multi-sequence MRI are needed. We developed and pretrained a deep learning (DL) model using publicly available datasets A (n = 210) and B (n = 369) containing FLAIR, T2WI, and contrast-enhanced (CE)-T1WI. This was then fine-tuned with our institutional dataset (n = 197) containing ADC, T2WI, and CE-T1WI, manually annotated by radiologists, and split into training (n = 100) and testing (n = 97) sets. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) was used to compare model outputs and manual labels. A third independent radiologist assessed segmentation quality on a semi-quantitative 5-scale score. Differences in DSC between new and recurrent gliomas, and between uni or multifocal gliomas were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney test. Semi-quantitative analyses were compared using the chi-square test. We found that there was good agreement between segmentations from the fine-tuned DL model and ground truth manual segmentations (median DSC: 0.729, std-dev: 0.134). DSC was higher for newly diagnosed (0.807) than recurrent (0.698) (p < 0.001), and higher for unifocal (0.747) than multi-focal (0.613) cases (p = 0.001). Semi-quantitative scores of DL and manual segmentation were not significantly different (mean: 3.567 vs. 3.639; 93.8% vs. 97.9% scoring ≥ 3, p = 0.107). In conclusion, the proposed transfer learning DL performed similarly to human radiologists in glioma segmentation on both structural and ADC sequences. Further improvement in segmenting challenging postoperative and multifocal glioma cases is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.