In this paper we report the set-up and results of the Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS) organized in conjunction with the MICCAI 2012 and 2013 conferences Twenty state-of-the-art tumor segmentation algorithms were applied to a set of 65 multi-contrast MR scans of low- and high-grade glioma patients—manually annotated by up to four raters—and to 65 comparable scans generated using tumor image simulation software Quantitative evaluations revealed considerable disagreement between the human raters in segmenting various tumor sub-regions (Dice scores in the range 74%–85%), illustrating the difficulty of this task We found that different algorithms worked best for different sub-regions (reaching performance comparable to human inter-rater variability), but that no single algorithm ranked in the top for all sub-regions simultaneously Fusing several good algorithms using a hierarchical majority vote yielded segmentations that consistently ranked above all individual algorithms, indicating remaining opportunities for further methodological improvements The BRATS image data and manual annotations continue to be publicly available through an online evaluation system as an ongoing benchmarking resource

/pdf/the-multimodal-brain-tumor-image-segmentation-benchmark-2gfraj98dk.pdf

The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS)

Medical image registration is an important task in medical image processing. It refers to the process of aligning data sets, possibly from different modalities (e.g., magnetic resonance and computed tomography), different time points (e.g., follow-up scans), and/or different subjects (in case of population studies). A large number of methods for image registration are described in the literature. Unfortunately, there is not one method that works for all applications. We have therefore developed elastix, a publicly available computer program for intensity-based medical image registration. The software consists of a collection of algorithms that are commonly used to solve medical image registration problems. The modular design of elastix allows the user to quickly configure, test, and compare different registration methods for a specific application. The command-line interface enables automated processing of large numbers of data sets, by means of scripting. The usage of elastix for comparing different registration methods is illustrated with three example experiments, in which individual components of the registration method are varied.

elastix : A Toolbox for Intensity-Based Medical Image Registration

https://engineering.case.edu/centers/ccipd/sites/ccipd.case.edu/files/Evaluation_of_prostate_segmentation_algorithms_for_MRI.pdf

Evaluation of prostate segmentation algorithms for MRI: the PROMISE12 challenge.

In this work, we report the set-up and results of the Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LITS) organized in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2016 and International Conference On Medical Image Computing Computer Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2017. Twenty four valid state-of-the-art liver and liver tumor segmentation algorithms were applied to a set of 131 computed tomography (CT) volumes with different types of tumor contrast levels (hyper-/hypo-intense), abnormalities in tissues (metastasectomie) size and varying amount of lesions. The submitted algorithms have been tested on 70 undisclosed volumes. The dataset is created in collaboration with seven hospitals and research institutions and manually reviewed by independent three radiologists. We found that not a single algorithm performed best for liver and tumors. The best liver segmentation algorithm achieved a Dice score of 0.96(MICCAI) whereas for tumor segmentation the best algorithm evaluated at 0.67(ISBI) and 0.70(MICCAI). The LITS image data and manual annotations continue to be publicly available through an online evaluation system as an ongoing benchmarking resource.

The Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS)

Automatic segmentation of the liver and its lesion is an important step towards deriving quantitative biomarkers for accurate clinical diagnosis and computer-aided decision support systems. This paper presents a method to automatically segment liver and lesions in CT abdomen images using cascaded fully convolutional neural networks (CFCNs) and dense 3D conditional random fields (CRFs). We train and cascade two FCNs for a combined segmentation of the liver and its lesions. In the first step, we train a FCN to segment the liver as ROI input for a second FCN. The second FCN solely segments lesions from the predicted liver ROIs of step 1. We refine the segmentations of the CFCN using a dense 3D CRF that accounts for both spatial coherence and appearance. CFCN models were trained in a 2-fold cross-validation on the abdominal CT dataset 3DIRCAD comprising 15 hepatic tumor volumes. Our results show that CFCN-based semantic liver and lesion segmentation achieves Dice scores over \(94\,\%\) for liver with computation times below 100 s per volume. We experimentally demonstrate the robustness of the proposed method as a decision support system with a high accuracy and speed for usage in daily clinical routine.

/pdf/automatic-liver-and-lesion-segmentation-in-ct-using-cascaded-12jg3sz2zh.pdf

Automatic Liver and Lesion Segmentation in CT Using Cascaded Fully Convolutional Neural Networks and 3D Conditional Random Fields

This paper presents a comparison study between 10 automatic and six interactive methods for liver segmentation from contrast-enhanced CT images. It is based on results from the "MICCAI 2007 Grand Challenge" workshop, where 16 teams evaluated their algorithms on a common database. A collection of 20 clinical images with reference segmentations was provided to train and tune algorithms in advance. Participants were also allowed to use additional proprietary training data for that purpose. All teams then had to apply their methods to 10 test datasets and submit the obtained results. Employed algorithms include statistical shape models, atlas registration, level-sets, graph-cuts and rule-based systems. All results were compared to reference segmentations five error measures that highlight different aspects of segmentation accuracy. All measures were combined according to a specific scoring system relating the obtained values to human expert variability. In general, interactive methods reached higher average scores than automatic approaches and featured a better consistency of segmentation quality. However, the best automatic methods (mainly based on statistical shape models with some additional free deformation) could compete well on the majority of test images. The study provides an insight in performance of different segmentation approaches under real-world conditions and highlights achievements and limitations of current image analysis techniques.

G. Soza

Papers

Comparison and Evaluation of Methods for Liver Segmentation From CT Datasets