Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38703470›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2024

LST-AI: A deep learning ensemble for accurate MS lesion segmentation.

Tun Wiltgen, Julian McGinnis, Sarah Schlaeger, Florian Kofler, CuiCi Voon, Achim Berthele, Daria Bischl, Lioba Grundl, Nikolaus Will, Marie Metz and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The role of dopamine decline, astrocyte reactivity and cerebral small-vessel disease in cognitive aging.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mechanistic Insights into the Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in the Diagnosis and Management of Multiple Sclerosis.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Tun WiltgenDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; TUM-Neuroimaging Center, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Julian McGinnisDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; TUM-Neuroimaging Center, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Computer Science, Institute for AI in Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Sarah SchlaegerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Florian KoflerDepartment of Computer Science, Institute for AI in Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; TranslaTUM, Central Institute for Translational Cancer Research of the Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Helmholtz AI, Helmholtz Munich, Neuherberg, Germany.
CuiCi VoonDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; TUM-Neuroimaging Center, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Achim BertheleDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Daria BischlDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Lioba GrundlDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Nikolaus WillDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Marie MetzDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
David SchinzDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Dominik SeppDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Philipp PruckerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Benita Schmitz-KoepDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Claus ZimmerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Bjoern MenzeDepartment of Quantitative Biomedicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Daniel RueckertDepartment of Computer Science, Institute for AI in Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Computing, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Bernhard HemmerDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Munich Cluster for Systems Neurology (SyNergy), Munich, Germany.
Jan KirschkeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Mark MühlauDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; TUM-Neuroimaging Center, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: mark.muehlau@tum.de.
Benedikt WiestlerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; TranslaTUM, Central Institute for Translational Cancer Research of the Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; AI for Image-Guided Diagnosis and Therapy, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

Computational Imaging Biomarkers of Multiple SclerosisR01NS112161 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI VAN LEEMPUT, KOEN · 2019 to 2023
$1.5M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS112161
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automated segmentation of brain white matter lesions is crucial for both clinical assessment and scientific research in multiple sclerosis (MS). Over a decade ago, we introduced an engineered lesion segmentation tool, LST. While recent lesion segmentation approaches have leveraged artificial intelligence (AI), they often remain proprietary and difficult to adopt. As an open-source tool, we present LST-AI, an advanced deep learning-based extension of LST that consists of an ensemble of three 3D U-Nets. LST-AI explicitly addresses the imbalance between white matter (WM) lesions and non-lesioned WM. It employs a composite loss function incorporating binary cross-entropy and Tversky loss to improve segmentation of the highly heterogeneous MS lesions. We train the network ensemble on 491 MS pairs of T1-weighted and FLAIR images, collected in-house from a 3T MRI scanner, and expert neuroradiologists manually segmented the utilized lesion maps for training. LST-AI also includes a lesion location annotation tool, labeling lesions as periventricular, infratentorial, and juxtacortical according to the 2017 McDonald criteria, and, additionally, as subcortical. We conduct evaluations on 103 test cases consisting of publicly available data using the Anima segmentation validation tools and compare LST-AI with several publicly available lesion segmentation models. Our empirical analysis shows that LST-AI achieves superior performance compared to existing methods. Its Dice and F1 scores exceeded 0.62, outperforming LST, SAMSEG (Sequence Adaptive Multimodal SEGmentation), and the popular nnUNet framework, which all scored below 0.56. Notably, LST-AI demonstrated exceptional performance on the MSSEG-1 challenge dataset, an international WM lesion segmentation challenge, with a Dice score of 0.65 and an F1 score of 0.63-surpassing all other competing models at the time of the challenge. With increasing lesion volume, the lesion detection rate rapidly increased with a detection rate of >75% for lesions with a volume between 10 mm

Indexed as

Deep LearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingMultiple SclerosisWhite MatterAdultBrainFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleNeuroimagingArtificial IntelligenceDeep LearningLesion SegmentationMagnetic Resonance ImagingMultiple SclerosisWhite Matter Lesions

Identifiers

PMID38703470
PMCPMC11088188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.