Artificial intelligence in glioma imaging: Challenges and advances
Open accessAbstract
Primary brain tumors including gliomas continue to pose significant management challenges to clinicians. While the presentation, the pathology, and the clinical course of these lesions are variable, the initial investigations are usually similar. Patients who are suspected to have a brain tumor will be assessed with computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The imaging findings are used by neurosurgeons to determine the feasibility of surgical resection and plan such an undertaking. Imaging studies are also an indispensable tool in tracking tumor progression or its response to treatment. As these imaging studies are non-invasive, relatively cheap and accessible to patients, there have been many efforts over the past two decades to increase the amount of clinically-relevant information that can be extracted from brain imaging. Most recently, artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have been employed to segment and characterize brain tumors, as well as to detect progression or treatment-response. However, the clinical utility of such endeavours remains limited due to challenges in data collection and annotation, model training, and the reliability of AI-generated information. We provide a review of recent advances in addressing the above challenges. First, to overcome the challenge of data paucity, different image imputation and synthesis techniques along with annotation collection efforts are summarized. Next, various training strategies are presented to meet multiple desiderata, such as model performance, generalization ability, data privacy protection, and learning with sparse annotations. Finally, standardized performance evaluation and model interpretability methods have been reviewed. We believe that these technical approaches will facilitate the development of a fully-functional AI tool in the clinical care of patients with gliomas.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Previous works have evaluated XAI in AI-based CDSS, but only as a secondary aspect.
“Previous works have evaluated XAI in AI-based CDSS, but only as a secondary aspect [99,101,103].”
From Current Challenges and Future Opportunities for XAI in Machine Learning-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [99]
Perturbation-based models that use model-agnostic explanations are common in the literature and have been used in two of the proposed CDSS.
“In terms of post-hoc explainability, perturbation-based models that use model-agnostic explanations are common in the literature [98,99,118,120,127] and have been used in two of the proposed CDSS [118,120].”
From Current Challenges and Future Opportunities for XAI in Machine Learning-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [99]
Jin et al. reported that there is a lack of evaluation of XAI techniques on glioma imaging due to lack of focus on practical challenges relating to clinical implementation of XAI.
“Moreover, Jin et al. [99] reported that there is a lack of evaluation of XAI techniques on glioma imaging due to lack of focus on practical challenges relating to clinical implementation of XAI.”
From Current Challenges and Future Opportunities for XAI in Machine Learning-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [99]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 157 · Cited by 55
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Liu M-Y, Breuel T and Kautz J 2017 Unsupervised image-to-image translation networks Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems pp 700-8
- Konyushkova K, Sznitman R and Fua P 2017 Learning active learning from data Adv. Neural Inf. Proc. Syst. pp 4225-35
- Timmermans B, Szlávik Z and Sips R-J 2016 Crowdsourcing ground truth data for analysing brainstem tumors in children Belgium Netherlands Artificial Conf. (BNAIC)
- Mlynarski P, Delingette He, Criminisi A and Ayache N 2019 Deep learning with mixed supervision for brain tumor segmentation J. Med. Imaging 6 1-13 · DOI
- Authors
- Jin, W., Fatehi, M., Abhishek, K., Mallya, M., Toyota, B., & Hamarneh, G.
- Affiliations
- Simon Fraser University (CA)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Queen's University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Jin, Weina
- Fatehi, Mostafa
- Mallya, Mayur
- Hamarneh, Ghassan
- Venue
- Journal of Neural Engineering
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2020-04-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 021002
- ISSN
- 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-2560
- OpenAlex
- W3010798784
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 157
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 0.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Simon Fraser University Big Data The Next Big Question Fund
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
- Keywords
- glioma, artificial intelligence, brain tumor segmentation, tumor progression detection, treatment response assessment, data scarcity, image generation, data annotation, sparse annotations, data privacy, model generalization, model interpretability, performance evaluation, magnetic resonance imaging, CT
- MeSH terms
- Artificial Intelligence, Glioma, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review