2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-11726-9_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Brain Tumor Segmentation and Tractographic Feature Extraction from Structural MR Images for Overall Survival Prediction

Abstract: This paper introduces a novel methodology to integrate human brain connectomics and parcellation for brain tumor segmentation and survival prediction. For segmentation, we utilize an existing brain parcellation atlas in the MNI152 1mm space and map this parcellation to each individual subject data. We use deep neural network architectures together with hard negative mining to achieve the final voxel level classification. For survival prediction, we present a new method for combining features from connectomics … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
61
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, our method is a much more efficient algorithm yet can achieve comparable segmentation accuracy. We also show a visual comparison of the brain tumor segmentation results of various methods including 3D UNet [1], Kao et al [16] and our DMFNet in Fig. 3.…”
Section: Experimental Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, our method is a much more efficient algorithm yet can achieve comparable segmentation accuracy. We also show a visual comparison of the brain tumor segmentation results of various methods including 3D UNet [1], Kao et al [16] and our DMFNet in Fig. 3.…”
Section: Experimental Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…BS refers to batch size. S/M/L refers to the small/medium/large batch size, indicating batch size of (1, 16, 32), (1,8,16), (1,16,32) for the RV, aorta, LV respectively. LR refers to the learning rate.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table IV compares the accuracy of the proposed method with other state-of-the-art techniques. Methods proposed in [13], [14] uses the dataset of BraTS 2017 whereas other methods [19]- [22], [25], [26] use BraTS 2018 dataset. In [19], classifier training set is made up of the images with GTR status.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Classifier(s) Accuracy% [13] Ensemble of random forest and multi layer perceptron 52.6 [14] Linear Discriminant 46 [19] Linear SVM GTR set 63 [20] Neural network and random forest 38 [21] Artificial neural network 54.5 [22] Multi layer perceptron 50.8 [25] XGBoost 65 [26] Ensemble of random forest and regression network 47.5…”
Section: Refmentioning
confidence: 99%