4.6 Article

Automatic PET cervical tumor segmentation by combining deep learning and anatomic prior

期刊

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
卷 64, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab0b64

关键词

cervical tumor segmentation; PET image; CNN; prior anatomy information

资金

  1. Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas [RP160661]
  2. US National Institutes of Health [R01 EB020366]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cervical tumor segmentation on 3D (18)FDG PET images is a challenging task because of the proximity between cervix and bladder, both of which can uptake (18)FDG tracers. This problem makes traditional segmentation based on intensity variation methods ineffective and reduces overall accuracy. Based on anatomy knowledge, including 'roundness' of the cervical tumor and relative positioning between the bladder and cervix, we propose a supervised machine learning method that integrates convolutional neural network (CNN) with this prior information to segment cervical tumors. First, we constructed a spatial information embedded CNN model (S-CNN) that maps the PET image to its corresponding label map, in which bladder, other normal tissue, and cervical tumor pixels are labeled as -1, 0, and 1, respectively. Then, we obtained the final segmentation from the output of the network by a prior information constrained (PIC) thresholding method. We evaluated the performance of the PIC-S-CNN method on PET images from 50 cervical cancer patients. The PICS-CNN method achieved a mean Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 0.84 while region-growing, Chan-Vese, graph-cut, fully convolutional neural networks (FCN) based FCN-8 stride, and FCN-2 stride, and U-net achieved 0.55, 0.64, 0.67, 0.71, 0.77, and 0.80 mean DSC, respectively. The proposed PIC-S-CNN provides a more accurate way for segmenting cervical tumors on 3D PET images. Our results suggest that combining deep learning and anatomic prior information may improve segmentation accuracy for cervical tumors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据