% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Schelb:165963,
author = {P. Schelb$^*$ and A. A. Tavakoli$^*$ and T. Tubtawee$^*$
and T. Hielscher$^*$ and J.-P. Radtke and M. Görtz and V.
Schütz and T. A. Kuder$^*$ and L. Schimmöller and A.
Stenzinger and M. Hohenfellner and H.-P. Schlemmer$^*$ and
D. Bonekamp$^*$},
title = {{C}omparison of {P}rostate {MRI} {L}esion {S}egmentation
{A}greement {B}etween {M}ultiple {R}adiologists and a
{F}ully {A}utomatic {D}eep {L}earning {S}ystem.[{V}ergleich
der {K}ongruenz von
{P}rostata-{MRT}-{L}äsionssegmentationen durch mehrere
{R}adiologen und ein vollautomatisches
{D}eep-{L}earning-{S}ystem].},
journal = {RöFo},
volume = {193},
number = {5},
issn = {1438-9010},
address = {Stuttgart [u.a.]},
publisher = {Thieme},
reportid = {DKFZ-2020-02512},
pages = {559-573},
year = {2021},
note = {#EA:E010#LA:E010#2021 May;193(5):559-573},
abstract = {A recently developed deep learning model (U-Net)
approximated the clinical performance of radiologists in the
prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC)
from prostate MRI. Here, we compare the agreement between
lesion segmentations by U-Net with manual lesion
segmentations performed by different radiologists. 165
patients with suspicion for sPC underwent targeted and
systematic fusion biopsy following 3 Tesla multiparametric
MRI (mpMRI). Five sets of segmentations were generated
retrospectively: segmentations of clinical lesions,
independent segmentations by three radiologists, and fully
automated bi-parametric U-Net segmentations. Per-lesion
agreement was calculated for each rater by averaging Dice
coefficients with all overlapping lesions from other raters.
Agreement was compared using descriptive statistics and
linear mixed models. The mean Dice coefficient for manual
segmentations showed only moderate agreement at 0.48-0.52,
reflecting the difficult visual task of determining the
outline of otherwise jointly detected lesions. U-net
segmentations were significantly smaller than manual
segmentations (p < 0.0001) and exhibited a lower mean Dice
coefficient of 0.22, which was significantly lower compared
to manual segmentations (all p < 0.0001). These differences
remained after correction for lesion size and were
unaffected between sPC and non-sPC lesions and between
peripheral and transition zone lesions. Knowledge of the
order of agreement of manual segmentations of different
radiologists is important to set the expectation value for
artificial intelligence (AI) systems in the task of prostate
MRI lesion segmentation. Perfect agreement (Dice coefficient
of one) should not be expected for AI. Lower Dice
coefficients of U-Net compared to manual segmentations are
only partially explained by smaller segmentation sizes and
may result from a focus on the lesion core and a small
relative lesion center shift. Although it is primarily
important that AI detects sPC correctly, the Dice
coefficient for overlapping lesions from multiple raters can
be used as a secondary measure for segmentation quality in
future studies. · Intermediate human Dice coefficients
reflect the difficulty of outlining jointly detected
lesions.. · Lower Dice coefficients of deep learning
motivate further research to approximate human perception..
· Comparable predictive performance of deep learning
appears independent of Dice agreement.. · Dice agreement
independent of significant cancer presence indicates
indistinguishability of some benign imaging findings.. ·
Improving DWI to T2 registration may improve the observed
U-Net Dice coefficients..· Schelb P, Tavakoli AA, Tubtawee
T et al. Comparison of Prostate MRI Lesion Segmentation
Agreement Between Multiple Radiologists and a Fully
Automatic Deep Learning System. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2020;
DOI: 10.1055/a-1290-8070.},
cin = {E010 / C060 / E020},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)E010-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331 /
I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331},
pnm = {315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:33212541},
doi = {10.1055/a-1290-8070},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/165963},
}