2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.102104
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic detection of lesion load change in Multiple Sclerosis using convolutional neural networks with segmentation confidence

Abstract: The detection of new or enlarged white-matter lesions in multiple sclerosis is a vital task in the monitoring of patients undergoing disease-modifying treatment for multiple sclerosis. However, the definition of 'new or enlarged' is not fixed, and it is known that lesion-counting is highly subjective, with high degree of inter-and intra-rater variability. Automated methods for lesion quantification, if accurate enough, hold the potential to make the detection of new and enlarged lesions consistent and repeatab… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
52
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
3
52
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A more useful comparison for the healthy-appearing tissue labels would be between our automated tool and expert manual labels (although these, too, will suffer from substantial inter- and intra-rater variability): alternatively, as in Cerri et al 31 a comparison could be made to more robust tools, incorporating lesion filling. Finally, we only examined cross-sectional performance: in a companion study 26 , we demonstrate the applicability of the DeepSCAN classifier for detecting changes in lesion loads, making use of the segmentation uncertainty, but it would also be of merit to validate longitudinal performance of a range of classifiers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A more useful comparison for the healthy-appearing tissue labels would be between our automated tool and expert manual labels (although these, too, will suffer from substantial inter- and intra-rater variability): alternatively, as in Cerri et al 31 a comparison could be made to more robust tools, incorporating lesion filling. Finally, we only examined cross-sectional performance: in a companion study 26 , we demonstrate the applicability of the DeepSCAN classifier for detecting changes in lesion loads, making use of the segmentation uncertainty, but it would also be of merit to validate longitudinal performance of a range of classifiers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 . Following 26 – 28 , the network was trained using a combination of multi-class cross-entropy loss and a label-flip loss for each individual tissue class which quantifies label uncertainty. Training of the classifier was performed using the ADAM optimiser, with a cosine-annealing learning rate schedule applied over each epoch 29 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another limitation of the current study is our attention only to cross-sectional data. In a companion study [30], we propose to look at longitudinal imaging of the same Insel32 dataset, in order to demonstrate the viability of automated methods for reliably detecting changes in lesion loads. Improved labelling (weak 29 or human-derived) of the healthy-appearing tissue, in particular the cortex, would allow such methods to be applied also to atrophy biomarkers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Initial attempts relied on the small numbers (30) of hand labelled brains, while later attempts have leveraged the availability of large cohorts of imaging data by training on the outputs of existing (non-learning-based) automated tools such as Freesurfer and FSL-FIRST [16,17]. Segmentation of deep-white matter structures is highly relevant in multiple sclerosis, since a recent study of 1,417 MS patients has shown links between deep grey matter volume loss and worsening condition in multiple sclerosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[33] To overcome these limitations of manual segmentation, different DL architectures and networks have been used, yielding dice coefficients ranging from 0.48 to 0.95 for WM lesion segmentation. [33][34][35][36] Therefore, in a recent publication, it was shown that this processing step can be improved by regression by also generating distance maps of the lesions. [37] This could provide more information about lesion geometry, structure, and changes similar to lesion probability mapping.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%