ArticleYonsei medical journal2026
Deep Learning for Automated Tumor Segmentation of Rectal Cancer on T2-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Images.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop a deep learning (DL)-based automated segmentation model for rectal cancer on T2-weighted (T2W) magnetic resonance (MR) images. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 458 patients who underwent baseline rectal MR imaging were retrospectively enrolled. An experienced radiologist labeled the tumor on each slice of the selected T2W axial images covering the entire tumor mass, and tumor volume was measured during labeling. Another radiologist labeled the rectum on the same images. Attention U-Net was trained on the T2W images from the training dataset to classify each voxel as tumor or non-tumor. Segmentation with or without rectum guidance was compared using evaluation metrics, including the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), in the test dataset.
resultsThe tumor segmentation DSC without rectum guidance was 73.35% (71.97-74.71); that with the predicted rectum was 71.79% (70.53-73.05); and that with the overlaid rectum was 75.52% (74.32-76.62), which was the highest among the three segmentation models. Tumor volume showed a positive correlation with tumor segmentation accuracy with the predicted rectum (r=0.333,
conclusionA DL-based automated segmentation model can predict RC with over 70% accuracy, which was further improved with overlaid rectum, and larger tumor volume.
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.