Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42011184›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026

Automatic segmentation of the urethra and prostate zones with deep learning on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.

William Holmlund, Attila Simkó, Karin Söderkvist, Péter Palásti, Szilvia Tótin, Kamilla Kalmár, Zsófia Domoki, Zsuzsanna Fejes, Tamás Z Kincses, Patrik Brynolfsson and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

11 authors.

William HolmlundUmeå University, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Umeå, Sweden.
Attila SimkóUmeå University, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Umeå, Sweden.
Karin SöderkvistUmeå University, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Umeå, Sweden.
Péter PalástiUniversity of Szeged, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, Department of Radiology, Szeged, Hungary.
Szilvia TótinUniversity of Szeged, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, Department of Radiology, Szeged, Hungary.
Kamilla KalmárUniversity of Szeged, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, Department of Radiology, Szeged, Hungary.
Zsófia DomokiUniversity of Szeged, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, Department of Radiology, Szeged, Hungary.
Zsuzsanna FejesUniversity of Szeged, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, Department of Radiology, Szeged, Hungary.
Tamás Z KincsesUniversity of Szeged, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, Department of Radiology, Szeged, Hungary.
Patrik BrynolfssonUmeå University, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Umeå, Sweden.
Tufve NyholmUmeå University, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Umeå, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Accurate segmentation of the urethra is crucial for safe focal dose escalated radiotherapy, while prostate zone identification is important for prostate cancer diagnosis. Manual delineations on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are labour-intensive and variable, and while deep learning offers promise in automating this process, no available solution currently exists. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a deep learning model for automatic segmentation of the urethra, prostate and all prostate zones and benchmark its performance against inter-reader variability and assess generalisability to external data from a different MRI vendor. Materials and methods: The public datasets ProstateZones and PROSTATEx included 200 magnetic resonance images with manual delineations, with 160 used for training/validation and 40 with independent duplicate segmentations used as a test set. A nnU-Net deep learning model was evaluated on the unseen test set and externally validated on a dataset with 55 samples. Performance was assessed using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Surface DSC, percentile Symmetric Surface Distance, and Center Line Distance (CLD) metrics. Results: The model outperformed the inter-reader variability on multiple structures, and notably on all metrics for the urethra, with median CLD values of 2.8 and 2.9 mm compared to 3.6 mm for inter-reader variability. External validation showed robust generalisability to a dataset collected from a different vendor. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that a deep learning model can achieve expert-level performance in automated segmentation of the urethra, prostate, and prostate zones. Robust performance on external data highlighted potential as a decision support solution.

Indexed as

Automatic SegmentationProstate ZonesUrethra

Identifiers

PMID42011184
PMCPMC13091743

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.