Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39113123›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024

The impact of multicentric datasets for the automated tumor delineation in primary prostate cancer using convolutional neural networks on

Julius C Holzschuh, Michael Mix, Martin T Freitag, Tobias Hölscher, Anja Braune, Jörg Kotzerke, Alexis Vrachimis, Paul Doolan, Harun Ilhan, Ioana M Marinescu and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Theranostics.Journal of nuclear medicine technology · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

17 authors.

Julius C HolzschuhDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany. julius.holzschuh@dkfz.de.
Michael MixDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Martin T FreitagDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Tobias HölscherDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Anja BrauneDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Jörg KotzerkeDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Alexis VrachimisDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus.
Paul DoolanDepartment of Medical Physics, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus.
Harun IlhanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital - Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany.
Ioana M MarinescuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany.
Simon K B SpohnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany.
Tobias FechterDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany.
Dejan KuhnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany.
Christian GratzkeDepartment of Urology, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Radu GrosuCyber-Physical Systems Division, Institute of Computer Engineering and Faculty of Informatics, Technical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Anca-Ligia GrosuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany.
C ZamboglouDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site DKTK, Freiburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeConvolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) have emerged as transformative tools in the field of radiation oncology, significantly advancing the precision of contouring practices. However, the adaptability of these algorithms across diverse scanners, institutions, and imaging protocols remains a considerable obstacle. This study aims to investigate the effects of incorporating institution-specific datasets into the training regimen of CNNs to assess their generalization ability in real-world clinical environments. Focusing on a data-centric analysis, the influence of varying multi- and single center training approaches on algorithm performance is conducted.

methodsnnU-Net is trained using a dataset comprising 161

resultsThe mixed training approach yielded a median DSC of 0.76 (IQR: 0.64-0.84) in a five-fold cross-validation, showing no significant differences (p = 0.18) compared to models trained with data exclusion from each center, which performed with a median DSC of 0.74 (IQR: 0.56-0.86). Significant performance improvements regarding multi-center training were observed for the Dresden cohort (multi-center median DSC 0.71, IQR: 0.58-0.80 vs. single-center 0.68, IQR: 0.50-0.80, p < 0.001) and Cyprus cohort (multi-center 0.74, IQR: 0.62-0.83 vs. single-center 0.72, IQR: 0.54-0.82, p < 0.01). While Munich and Freiburg also showed performance improvements with multi-center training, results showed no statistical significance (Munich: multi-center DSC 0.74, IQR: 0.60-0.80 vs. single-center 0.72, IQR: 0.59-0.82, p > 0.05; Freiburg: multi-center 0.78, IQR: 0.53-0.87 vs. single-center 0.71, IQR: 0.53-0.83, p = 0.23).

conclusionCNNs trained for auto contouring intraprostatic GTV in

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerProstatic NeoplasmsAlgorithmsDatasets as TopicFluorine RadioisotopesHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleNiacinamideOligopeptidesPositron-Emission TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsFluorine RadioisotopesNiacinamideOligopeptidesPSMA-1007Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID39113123
PMCPMC11304577

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.