Dataset Information

Glioblastoma Segmentation: Comparison of Three Different Software Packages.

ABSTRACT: To facilitate a more widespread use of volumetric tumor segmentation in clinical studies, there is an urgent need for reliable, user-friendly segmentation software. The aim of this study was therefore to compare three different software packages for semi-automatic brain tumor segmentation of glioblastoma; namely BrainVoyagerTM QX, ITK-Snap and 3D Slicer, and to make data available for future reference. Pre-operative, contrast enhanced T1-weighted 1.5 or 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans were obtained in 20 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for glioblastoma. MRI scans were segmented twice in each software package by two investigators. Intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software agreement was compared by using differences of means with 95% limits of agreement (LoA), Dice's similarity coefficients (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). Time expenditure of segmentations was measured using a stopwatch. Eighteen tumors were included in the analyses. Inter-rater agreement was highest for BrainVoyager with difference of means of 0.19 mL and 95% LoA from -2.42 mL to 2.81 mL. Between-software agreement and 95% LoA were very similar for the different software packages. Intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software DSC were ? 0.93 in all analyses. Time expenditure was approximately 41 min per segmentation in BrainVoyager, and 18 min per segmentation in both 3D Slicer and ITK-Snap. Our main findings were that there is a high agreement within and between the software packages in terms of small intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software differences of means and high Dice's similarity coefficients. Time expenditure was highest for BrainVoyager, but all software packages were relatively time-consuming, which may limit usability in an everyday clinical setting.

SUBMITTER: Fyllingen EH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5079567 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Glioblastoma Segmentation: Comparison of Three Different Software Packages.

Fyllingen Even Hovig EH Stensjøen Anne Line AL Berntsen Erik Magnus EM Solheim Ole O Reinertsen Ingerid I

PloS one 20161025 10

To facilitate a more widespread use of volumetric tumor segmentation in clinical studies, there is an urgent need for reliable, user-friendly segmentation software. The aim of this study was therefore to compare three different software packages for semi-automatic brain tumor segmentation of glioblastoma; namely BrainVoyagerTM QX, ITK-Snap and 3D Slicer, and to make data available for future reference. Pre-operative, contrast enhanced T1-weighted 1.5 or 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) s ...[more]

PMID: 27780224

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Pyrosequencing has emerged as an alternative method of nucleic acid sequencing, well suited for many applications which aim to characterize single nucleotide polymorphisms, mutations, microbial types and CpG methylation in the target DNA. The commercially available pyrosequencing systems can harbor two different types of software which allow analysis in AQ or CpG mode, respectively, both widely employed for DNA methylation analysis. OBJECTIVE:Aim of the study was to assess the performance for DNA methylation analysis at CpG sites of the two pyrosequencing software which allow analysis in AQ or CpG mode, respectively. Despite CpG mode having been specifically generated for CpG methylation quantification, many investigations on this topic have been carried out with AQ mode. As proof of equivalent performance of the two software for this type of analysis is not available, the focus of this paper was to evaluate if the two modes currently used for CpG methylation assessment by pyrosequencing may give overlapping results. METHODS:We compared the performance of the two software in quantifying DNA methylation in the promoter of selected genes (GSTP1, MGMT, LINE-1) by testing two case series which include DNA from paraffin embedded prostate cancer tissues (PC study, N = 36) and DNA from blood fractions of healthy people (DD study, N = 28), respectively. RESULTS:We found discrepancy in the two pyrosequencing software-based quality assignment of DNA methylation assays. Compared to the software for analysis in the AQ mode, less permissive criteria are supported by the Pyro Q-CpG software, which enables analysis in CpG mode. CpG mode warns the operators about potential unsatisfactory performance of the assay and ensures a more accurate quantitative evaluation of DNA methylation at CpG sites. CONCLUSION:The implementation of CpG mode is strongly advisable in order to improve the reliability of the methylation analysis results achievable by pyrosequencing.

Project description:Background:Radiological assessments of biologically relevant regions in glioblastoma have been associated with genotypic characteristics, implying a potential role in personalized medicine. Here, we assess the reproducibility and association with survival of two volumetric segmentation platforms and explore how methodology could impact subsequent interpretation and analysis. Methods:Post-contrast T1- and T2-weighted FLAIR MR images of 67 TCGA patients were segmented into five distinct compartments (necrosis, contrast-enhancement, FLAIR, post contrast abnormal, and total abnormal tumor volumes) by two quantitative image segmentation platforms - 3D Slicer and a method based on Velocity AI and FSL. We investigated the internal consistency of each platform by correlation statistics, association with survival, and concordance with consensus neuroradiologist ratings using ordinal logistic regression. Results:We found high correlations between the two platforms for FLAIR, post contrast abnormal, and total abnormal tumor volumes (spearman's r(67) = 0.952, 0.959, and 0.969 respectively). Only modest agreement was observed for necrosis and contrast-enhancement volumes (r(67) = 0.693 and 0.773 respectively), likely arising from differences in manual and automated segmentation methods of these regions by 3D Slicer and Velocity AI/FSL, respectively. Survival analysis based on AUC revealed significant predictive power of both platforms for the following volumes: contrast-enhancement, post contrast abnormal, and total abnormal tumor volumes. Finally, ordinal logistic regression demonstrated correspondence to manual ratings for several features. Conclusion:Tumor volume measurements from both volumetric platforms produced highly concordant and reproducible estimates across platforms for general features. As automated or semi-automated volumetric measurements replace manual linear or area measurements, it will become increasingly important to keep in mind that measurement differences between segmentation platforms for more detailed features could influence downstream survival or radio genomic analyses.

Dataset Information

Glioblastoma Segmentation: Comparison of Three Different Software Packages.

Publications

Glioblastoma Segmentation: Comparison of Three Different Software Packages.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure