ArticleComputer methods and programs in biomedicine2026
Liver cancer segmentator: Metadata-guided confidence scoring for reliable segmentation of colorectal liver metastases in CT.
Article in Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThis study introduces the liver cancer segmentator (LCS), a deep learning model designed for automatic and robust segmentation of liver parenchyma and tumors in abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography images from patients with colorectal liver metastases. The primary aim was to enhance confidence scoring for more reliable clinical segmentation assessment.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 446 abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography examinations were collected; 355 (80%) were used for training and 91 for testing. Data originated from routine clinical cases at two institutions, representing diverse disease stages and treatment settings. A state-of-the-art neural network segmentation framework was trained on these cases, with performance evaluated using the Dice score and the normalized surface distance. An iterative training process, supported by an integrated annotation workflow, was employed to refine the training set. The final model was applied to the 91 test examinations to assess the impact of tumor volume and slice thickness on confidence scoring. Reliability was quantified through pairwise Dice score for failure detection and the area under the risk coverage curve.
resultsThe LCS achieved a Dice score of 0.9707 (95% CI: 0.9663-0.9751) for liver parenchyma and 0.7695 (95% CI: 0.7166-0.8224) for tumors. Normalized surface distance values at a 3-millimeter tolerance were 0.9605 (95% CI: 0.9539-0.9671) for parenchyma and 0.8412 (95% CI: 0.7928-0.8896) for tumors. Confidence scoring analysis demonstrated strong correlations between tumor volume, slice thickness, and segmentation reliability, reducing the area under the risk coverage curve from 16.7 to 10.3.
conclusionsThe LCS achieved high segmentation accuracy in patients with colorectal liver metastases. Incorporating tumor volume and slice thickness into the confidence scoring process improved failure detection, enhanced reliability, and provided valuable insights for refining clinical deployment of automated segmentation algorithms.
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.