Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSunoqrot, Mohammed R. S.
dc.contributor.authorSelnæs, Kirsten Margrete
dc.contributor.authorSandsmark, Elise
dc.contributor.authorNketiah, Gabriel Addio
dc.contributor.authorZavala-Romero, Olmo
dc.contributor.authorStoyanova, Radka
dc.contributor.authorBathen, Tone Frost
dc.contributor.authorElschot, Mattijs
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-25T11:20:37Z
dc.date.available2020-09-25T11:20:37Z
dc.date.created2020-09-18T15:11:39Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn2075-4418
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2679703
dc.description.abstractComputer-aided detection and diagnosis (CAD) systems have the potential to improve robustness and efficiency compared to traditional radiological reading of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Fully automated segmentation of the prostate is a crucial step of CAD for prostate cancer, but visual inspection is still required to detect poorly segmented cases. The aim of this work was therefore to establish a fully automated quality control (QC) system for prostate segmentation based on T2-weighted MRI. Four different deep learning-based segmentation methods were used to segment the prostate for 585 patients. First order, shape and textural radiomics features were extracted from the segmented prostate masks. A reference quality score (QS) was calculated for each automated segmentation in comparison to a manual segmentation. A least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) was trained and optimized on a randomly assigned training dataset (N = 1756, 439 cases from each segmentation method) to build a generalizable linear regression model based on the radiomics features that best estimated the reference QS. Subsequently, the model was used to estimate the QSs for an independent testing dataset (N = 584, 146 cases from each segmentation method). The mean ± standard deviation absolute error between the estimated and reference QSs was 5.47 ± 6.33 on a scale from 0 to 100. In addition, we found a strong correlation between the estimated and reference QSs (rho = 0.70). In conclusion, we developed an automated QC system that may be helpful for evaluating the quality of automated prostate segmentations.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMDPIen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleA Quality Control System for Automated Prostate Segmentation on T2-Weighted MRIen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.volume10en_US
dc.source.journalDiagnostics (Basel)en_US
dc.source.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10090714
dc.identifier.cristin1831243
dc.description.localcode© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal