Cargando…
Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study
OBJECTIVES: To determine the reproducibility and replicability of studies that develop and validate segmentation methods for brain tumours on MRI and that follow established reproducibility criteria; and to evaluate whether the reporting guidelines are sufficient. METHODS: Two eligible validation st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9297223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35851016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059000 |
_version_ | 1784750429691707392 |
---|---|
author | Gryska, Emilia Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella Jakola, Asgeir Store Dunås, Tora Schneiderman, Justin Heckemann, Rolf A |
author_facet | Gryska, Emilia Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella Jakola, Asgeir Store Dunås, Tora Schneiderman, Justin Heckemann, Rolf A |
author_sort | Gryska, Emilia |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To determine the reproducibility and replicability of studies that develop and validate segmentation methods for brain tumours on MRI and that follow established reproducibility criteria; and to evaluate whether the reporting guidelines are sufficient. METHODS: Two eligible validation studies of distinct deep learning (DL) methods were identified. We implemented the methods using published information and retraced the reported validation steps. We evaluated to what extent the description of the methods enabled reproduction of the results. We further attempted to replicate reported findings on a clinical set of images acquired at our institute consisting of high-grade and low-grade glioma (HGG, LGG), and meningioma (MNG) cases. RESULTS: We successfully reproduced one of the two tumour segmentation methods. Insufficient description of the preprocessing pipeline and our inability to replicate the pipeline resulted in failure to reproduce the second method. The replication of the first method showed promising results in terms of Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and sensitivity (Sen) on HGG cases (DSC=0.77, Sen=0.88) and LGG cases (DSC=0.73, Sen=0.83), however, poorer performance was observed for MNG cases (DSC=0.61, Sen=0.71). Preprocessing errors were identified that contributed to low quantitative scores in some cases. CONCLUSIONS: Established reproducibility criteria do not sufficiently emphasise description of the preprocessing pipeline. Discrepancies in preprocessing as a result of insufficient reporting are likely to influence segmentation outcomes and hinder clinical utilisation. A detailed description of the whole processing chain, including preprocessing, is thus necessary to obtain stronger evidence of the generalisability of DL-based brain tumour segmentation methods and to facilitate translation of the methods into clinical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9297223 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92972232022-08-09 Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study Gryska, Emilia Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella Jakola, Asgeir Store Dunås, Tora Schneiderman, Justin Heckemann, Rolf A BMJ Open Research Methods OBJECTIVES: To determine the reproducibility and replicability of studies that develop and validate segmentation methods for brain tumours on MRI and that follow established reproducibility criteria; and to evaluate whether the reporting guidelines are sufficient. METHODS: Two eligible validation studies of distinct deep learning (DL) methods were identified. We implemented the methods using published information and retraced the reported validation steps. We evaluated to what extent the description of the methods enabled reproduction of the results. We further attempted to replicate reported findings on a clinical set of images acquired at our institute consisting of high-grade and low-grade glioma (HGG, LGG), and meningioma (MNG) cases. RESULTS: We successfully reproduced one of the two tumour segmentation methods. Insufficient description of the preprocessing pipeline and our inability to replicate the pipeline resulted in failure to reproduce the second method. The replication of the first method showed promising results in terms of Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and sensitivity (Sen) on HGG cases (DSC=0.77, Sen=0.88) and LGG cases (DSC=0.73, Sen=0.83), however, poorer performance was observed for MNG cases (DSC=0.61, Sen=0.71). Preprocessing errors were identified that contributed to low quantitative scores in some cases. CONCLUSIONS: Established reproducibility criteria do not sufficiently emphasise description of the preprocessing pipeline. Discrepancies in preprocessing as a result of insufficient reporting are likely to influence segmentation outcomes and hinder clinical utilisation. A detailed description of the whole processing chain, including preprocessing, is thus necessary to obtain stronger evidence of the generalisability of DL-based brain tumour segmentation methods and to facilitate translation of the methods into clinical practice. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-07-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9297223/ /pubmed/35851016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059000 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Methods Gryska, Emilia Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella Jakola, Asgeir Store Dunås, Tora Schneiderman, Justin Heckemann, Rolf A Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
title | Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
title_full | Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
title_fullStr | Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
title_full_unstemmed | Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
title_short | Deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on MRI: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
title_sort | deep learning for automatic brain tumour segmentation on mri: evaluation of recommended reporting criteria via a reproduction and replication study |
topic | Research Methods |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9297223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35851016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059000 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gryskaemilia deeplearningforautomaticbraintumoursegmentationonmrievaluationofrecommendedreportingcriteriaviaareproductionandreplicationstudy AT bjorkmanburtscherisabella deeplearningforautomaticbraintumoursegmentationonmrievaluationofrecommendedreportingcriteriaviaareproductionandreplicationstudy AT jakolaasgeirstore deeplearningforautomaticbraintumoursegmentationonmrievaluationofrecommendedreportingcriteriaviaareproductionandreplicationstudy AT dunastora deeplearningforautomaticbraintumoursegmentationonmrievaluationofrecommendedreportingcriteriaviaareproductionandreplicationstudy AT schneidermanjustin deeplearningforautomaticbraintumoursegmentationonmrievaluationofrecommendedreportingcriteriaviaareproductionandreplicationstudy AT heckemannrolfa deeplearningforautomaticbraintumoursegmentationonmrievaluationofrecommendedreportingcriteriaviaareproductionandreplicationstudy |