» Articles » PMID: 34852007

Improved Performance and Consistency of Deep Learning 3D Liver Segmentation with Heterogeneous Cancer Stages in Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2021 Dec 1
PMID 34852007
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Accurate liver segmentation is key for volumetry assessment to guide treatment decisions. Moreover, it is an important pre-processing step for cancer detection algorithms. Liver segmentation can be especially challenging in patients with cancer-related tissue changes and shape deformation. The aim of this study was to assess the ability of state-of-the-art deep learning 3D liver segmentation algorithms to generalize across all different Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) liver cancer stages.

Methods: This retrospective study, included patients from an institutional database that had arterial-phase T1-weighted magnetic resonance images with corresponding manual liver segmentations. The data was split into 70/15/15% for training/validation/testing each proportionally equal across BCLC stages. Two 3D convolutional neural networks were trained using identical U-net-derived architectures with equal sized training datasets: one spanning all BCLC stages ("All-Stage-Net": AS-Net), and one limited to early and intermediate BCLC stages ("Early-Intermediate-Stage-Net": EIS-Net). Segmentation accuracy was evaluated by the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) on a dataset spanning all BCLC stages and a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for pairwise comparisons.

Results: 219 subjects met the inclusion criteria (170 males, 49 females, 62.8±9.1 years) from all BCLC stages. Both networks were trained using 129 subjects: AS-Net training comprised 19, 74, 18, 8, and 10 BCLC 0, A, B, C, and D patients, respectively; EIS-Net training comprised 21, 86, and 22 BCLC 0, A, and B patients, respectively. DSCs (mean±SD) were 0.954±0.018 and 0.946±0.032 for AS-Net and EIS-Net (p<0.001), respectively. The AS-Net 0.956±0.014 significantly outperformed the EIS-Net 0.941±0.038 on advanced BCLC stages (p<0.001) and yielded similarly good segmentation performance on early and intermediate stages (AS-Net: 0.952±0.021; EIS-Net: 0.949±0.027; p = 0.107).

Conclusion: To ensure robust segmentation performance across cancer stages that is independent of liver shape deformation and tumor burden, it is critical to train deep learning models on heterogeneous imaging data spanning all BCLC stages.

Citing Articles

Systematic Review: AI Applications in Liver Imaging with a Focus on Segmentation and Detection.

Pomohaci M, Grasu M, Baicoianu-Nitescu A, Enache R, Lupescu I Life (Basel). 2025; 15(2).

PMID: 40003667 PMC: 11856300. DOI: 10.3390/life15020258.


Automated graded prognostic assessment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma using machine learning.

Gross M, Haider S, Zeevi T, Huber S, Arora S, Kucukkaya A Eur Radiol. 2024; 34(10):6940-6952.

PMID: 38536464 PMC: 11399284. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-10624-8.


Automated MRI liver segmentation for anatomical segmentation, liver volumetry, and the extraction of radiomics.

Gross M, Huber S, Arora S, Zeevi T, Haider S, Kucukkaya A Eur Radiol. 2024; 34(8):5056-5065.

PMID: 38217704 PMC: 11245591. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10495-5.


LiverHccSeg: A publicly available multiphasic MRI dataset with liver and HCC tumor segmentations and inter-rater agreement analysis.

Gross M, Arora S, Huber S, Kucukkaya A, Onofrey J Data Brief. 2023; 51:109662.

PMID: 37869619 PMC: 10587725. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2023.109662.


Systematic Analysis of Common Factors Impacting Deep Learning Model Generalizability in Liver Segmentation.

Konkel B, Macdonald J, Lafata K, Zaki I, Bozdogan E, Chaudhry M Radiol Artif Intell. 2023; 5(3):e220080.

PMID: 37293348 PMC: 10245179. DOI: 10.1148/ryai.220080.


References
1.
Bousabarah K, Letzen B, Tefera J, Savic L, Schobert I, Schlachter T . Automated detection and delineation of hepatocellular carcinoma on multiphasic contrast-enhanced MRI using deep learning. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020; 46(1):216-225. PMC: 7714704. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02604-5. View

2.
Onofrey J, Casetti-Dinescu D, Lauritzen A, Sarkar S, Venkataraman R, Fan R . GENERALIZABLE MULTI-SITE TRAINING AND TESTING OF DEEP NEURAL NETWORKS USING IMAGE NORMALIZATION. Proc IEEE Int Symp Biomed Imaging. 2020; 2019:348-351. PMC: 7457546. DOI: 10.1109/isbi.2019.8759295. View

3.
Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin J, Pujol S . 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012; 30(9):1323-41. PMC: 3466397. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001. View

4.
LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G . Deep learning. Nature. 2015; 521(7553):436-44. DOI: 10.1038/nature14539. View

5.
Takenaga T, Hanaoka S, Nomura Y, Nemoto M, Murata M, Nakao T . Four-dimensional fully convolutional residual network-based liver segmentation in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2019; 14(8):1259-1266. DOI: 10.1007/s11548-019-01935-z. View