CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1,412Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

The Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS)

Open access
Bilic, Patrick, Christ, Patrick, Li, Hongwei Bran, Vorontsov, Eugene, Ben-Cohen, Avi, Kaissis, Georgios, Szeskin, Adi, Jacobs, Colin +101 more·2019·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1901.04056arXiv 1901.04056PMC PMC10631490
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this work, we report the set-up and results of the Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS), which was organized in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2017 and the International Conferences on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2017 and 2018. The image dataset is diverse and contains primary and secondary tumors with varied sizes and appearances with various lesion-to-background levels (hyper-/hypo-dense), created in collaboration with seven hospitals and research institutions. Seventy-five submitted liver and liver tumor segmentation algorithms were trained on a set of 131 computed tomography (CT) volumes and were tested on 70 unseen test images acquired from different patients. We found that not a single algorithm performed best for both liver and liver tumors in the three events. The best liver segmentation algorithm achieved a Dice score of 0.963, whereas, for tumor segmentation, the best algorithms achieved Dices scores of 0.674 (ISBI 2017), 0.702 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.739 (MICCAI 2018). Retrospectively, we performed additional analysis on liver tumor detection and revealed that not all top-performing segmentation algorithms worked well for tumor detection. The best liver tumor detection method achieved a lesion-wise recall of 0.458 (ISBI 2017), 0.515 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.554 (MICCAI 2018), indicating the need for further research. LiTS remains an active benchmark and resource for research, e.g., contributing the liver-related segmentation tasks in \url{http://medicaldecathlon.com/}. In addition, both data and online evaluation are accessible via \url{www.lits-challenge.com}.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1901.04056

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Traditional methods like RCA exhibit higher RMSE than uncertainty-aware approaches on the skin cancer segmentation dataset.

    “In contrast, traditional methods like RCA [3] exhibit higher RMSE, underscoring the advantages of uncertainty-aware approaches.”

    From Uncertainty-aware segmentation quality prediction via deep learning Bayesian Modeling: Comprehensive evaluation and interpretation on skin cancer and liver segmentation (2025) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Results (Meta analysis and Results of individual challenges; page not provided) concern liver tumor segmentation and report Dice and ASD scores, not RMSE comparisons on a skin cancer dataset. Searches for RCA, RMSE, skin lesions, and uncertainty-aware methods found no passage addressing the attributed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 102

  1. Abdel-massieh NH, Hadhoud MM, Amin KM, 2010. Fully automatic liver tumor segmentation from abdominal CT scans. In: Computer Engineering and Systems (ICCES), 2010 International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 197– 202.
  2. Albain KS, Swann RS, Rusch VW, Turrisi AT, Shepherd FA, Smith C, Chen Y, Livingston RB, Feins RH, Gandara DR,, 2009. Radiotherapy plus chemotherapy with or without surgical resection for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase III randomised controlled trial. Lancet 374 (9687), 379– 386. 19632716 PMC4407808
  3. Antonelli M, Reinke A, Bakas S, Farahani K, Kopp-Schneider A, Landman BA, Litjens G, Menze B, Ronneberger O, Summers RM,, 2022. The medical segmentation decathlon. Nature Commun. 13 (1), 1– 13. 35840566 PMC9287542
  4. Bauknecht H-C, Romano VC, Rogalla P, Klingebiel R, Wolf C, Bornemann L, Hamm B, Hein PA, 2010. Intra-and interobserver variability of linear and volumetric measurements of brain metastases using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Invest. Radiol 45 (1), 49– 56. 19996757
  5. Ben-Dan I, Shenhav E, 2008. Liver tumor segmentation in CT images using probabilistic methods. In: MICCAI Workshop, vol. 41, p. 43.
  6. Blachier M, Leleu H, Peck-Radosavljevic M, Valla D-C, Roudot-Thoraval F, 2013. The burden of liver disease in Europe: A review of available epidemiological data. J. Hepatol 58 (3), 593– 608. 23419824
  7. Bornemann L, Dicken V, Kuhnigk J-M, Wormanns D, Shin H-O, Bauknecht H-C, Diehl V, Fabel M, Meier S, Kress O,, 2007. Oncotreat: A software assistant for cancer therapy monitoring. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg 1 (5), 231– 242.
  8. Cano-Espinosa C, González G, Washko GR, Cazorla M, Estépar RSJ, 2020. Biomarker localization from deep learning regression networks. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 39 (6), 2121– 2132. 31940523 PMC7307703
  9. Castro DC, Walker I, Glocker B, 2020. Causality matters in medical imaging. Nature Commun. 11 (1), 1– 10. 32699250 PMC7376027
  10. Chlebus G, Schenk A, Moltz JH, van Ginneken B, Hahn HK, Meine H, 2018. Automatic liver tumor segmentation in CT with fully convolutional neural networks and object-based postprocessing. Sci. Rep 8 (1), 1– 7. 30341319 PMC6195599
  11. Christ P, Elshaer MEA, Ettlinger F, Tatavarty S, Bickel M, Bilic P, Rempfler M, Armbruster M, Hofmann F, D’Anastasi M, Sommer WH, Ahmadi S-A, Menze BH, 2016. Automatic liver and lesion segmentation in CT using cascaded fully convolutional neural networks and 3D conditional random fields. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2016: 19th International Conference. pp. 415– 423.
  12. Ciecholewski M, Ogiela MR, 2007. Automatic segmentation of single and multiple neoplastic hepatic lesions in CT images. In: International Work-Conference on the Interplay Between Natural and Artificial Computation. Springer, pp. 63– 71.
  13. Cleary K., 2017. MIDAS - original datasets. http://insight-journal.org/midas/item/view/1346. (Accessed 01 December 2019).
  14. Conze P-H, Noblet V, Rousseau F, Heitz F, De Blasi V, Memeo R, Pessaux P, 2017. Scale-adaptive supervoxel-based random forests for liver tumor segmentation in dynamic contrast-enhanced CT scans. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg 12 (2), 223– 233. 27771843
  15. Cootes TF, Taylor CJ, Cooper DH, Graham J, 1995. Active shape models-their training and application. Comput. Vis. Image Underst 61 (1), 38– 59.
  16. Dawant BM, Li R, Lennon B, Li S, 2007. Semi-automatic segmentation of the liver and its evaluation on the MICCAI 2007 grand challenge data set. 3D Segm. Clin.: Grand Chall 215– 221.
  17. Deng X, Du G, 2008. 3D segmentation in the clinic: A grand challenge II-liver tumor segmentation. In: MICCAI Workshop.
  18. Dou Q, Chen H, Jin Y, Yu L, Qin J, Heng P-A, 2016. 3D deeply supervised network for automatic liver segmentation from ct volumes. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, pp. 149– 157.
  19. Eisenhauer E, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz L, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M,, 2009. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer 45 (2), 228– 247. 19097774
  20. Fang X, Yan P, 2020. Multi-organ segmentation over partially labeled datasets with multi-scale feature abstraction. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 39 (11), 3619– 3629. 32746108 PMC7665851
  21. Glocker B, Robinson R, Castro DC, Dou Q, Konukoglu E, 2019. Machine learning with multi-site imaging data: An empirical study on the impact of scanner effects. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.04597. · arXiv
  22. Gobbi PG, Broglia C, Di Giulio G, Mantelli M, Anselmo P, Merli F, Zinzani PL, Rossi G, Callea V, Iannitto E,, 2004. The clinical value of tumor burden at diagnosis in Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer: Interdiscipl. Int. J. Am. Cancer Soc 101 (8), 1824– 1834. 15372482
  23. Haghighi F, Taher MRH, Zhou Z, Gotway MB, Liang J, 2020. Learning semantics-enriched representation via self-discovery, self-classification, and self-restoration. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, pp. 137– 147. PMC9187496 35695848
  24. Haghighi F, Taher MRH, Zhou Z, Gotway MB, Liang J, 2021. Transferable visual words: Exploiting the semantics of anatomical patterns for self-supervised learning. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging. PMC8516596 33617450
  25. Hann LE, Winston CB, Brown KT, Akhurst T, 2000. Diagnostic imaging approaches and relationship to hepatobiliary cancer staging and therapy. In: Seminars in Surgical Oncology, vol. 19, (no. 2), Wiley Online Library, pp. 94– 115. 11126385
  26. Heimann T, Münzing S, Meinzer H-P, Wolf I, 2007. A shape-guided deformable model with evolutionary algorithm initialization for 3D soft tissue segmentation. In: Information Processing in Medical Imaging. Springer, pp. 1– 12. 17633684
  27. Heimann T, Van Ginneken B, Styner M, Arzhaeva Y, Aurich V, Bauer C, Beck A, Becker C, Beichel R, Bekes G, Bello F, Binnig G, Bischof H, Bornik A, Cashman P, Chi Y, Córdova A, Dawant B, Fidrich M, Furst J, Furukawa D, Grenacher L, Hornegger J, Kainmüller D, Kitney R, Kobatake H, Lamecker H, Lange T, Lee J, Lennon B, Li R, Li S, Meinzer H, Németh G, Raicu D, Rau A, Van Rikxoort E, Rousson M, Ruskó L, Saddi K, Schmidt G, Seghers D, Shimizu A, Slagmolen P, Sorantin E, Soza G, Susomboon R, Waite J, Wimmer A, Wolf I, 2009. Comparison and evaluation of methods for liver segmentation from CT datasets. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 28 (8), 1251– 1265. 19211338
  28. Heimann T, Wolf I, Meinzer H-P, 2006. Active shape models for a fully automated 3D segmentation of the liver–an evaluation on clinical data. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2006. Springer, pp. 41– 48. 17354754
  29. Heussel CP, Meier S, Wittelsberger S, Götte H, Mildenberger P, Kauczor H-U, 2007. Follow-up CT measurement of liver malignoma according to RECIST and WHO vs. volumetry. RoFo: Fortschr. Geb. Rontgenstr. Nuklearmed 179 (9), 958– 964. 17594629
  30. Hu P, Wu F, Peng J, Liang P, Kong D, 2016. Automatic 3D liver segmentation based on deep learning and globally optimized surface evolution. Phys. Med. Biol 61 (24), 8676. 27880735
  31. Huang R, Zheng Y, Hu Z, Zhang S, Li H, 2020. Multi-organ segmentation via co-training weight-averaged models from few-organ datasets. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, pp. 146– 155.
  32. Isensee F, Jaeger PF, Kohl SA, Petersen J, Maier-Hein KH, 2020. Nnu-Net: A self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation. Nature Methods 1– 9. 33288961
  33. Jagannath S, Velasquez WS, Tucker SL, Fuller LM, McLaughlin PW, Manning JT, North LB, Cabanillas FC, 1986. Tumor burden assessment and its implication for a prognostic model in advanced diffuse large-cell lymphoma. J. Clin. Oncol 4 (6), 859– 865. 2423653
  34. Jiménez Carretero D, Fernández de Manuel L, Pascau González Garzón J, Tellado JM, Ramon E, Desco Menéndez M, Santos A, Ledesma Carbayo MJ, 2011. Optimal multiresolution 3D level-set method for liver segmentation incorporating local curvature constraints. 22255074
  35. Kainmüller D, Lange T, Lamecker H, 2007. Shape constrained automatic segmentation of the liver based on a heuristic intensity model. In: Proc. MICCAI Workshop 3D Segmentation in the Clinic: A Grand Challenge. pp. 109– 116.
  36. Kass M, Witkin A, Terzopoulos D, 1988. Snakes: Active contour models. Int. J. Comput. Vis 1 (4), 321– 331.
  37. Kavur AE, Gezer NS, Barış M, Aslan S, Conze P-H, Groza V, Pham DD, Chatterjee S, Ernst P, Özkan S,, 2021. CHAOS challenge-combined (CT-MR) healthy abdominal organ segmentation. Med. Image Anal 69, 101950. 33421920
  38. Kuang K, Zhang L, Li J, Li H, Chen J, Du B, Yang J, 2022. What makes for automatic reconstruction of pulmonary segments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.03078. · arXiv
  39. Kuhnigk J-M, Dicken V, Bornemann L, Bakai A, Wormanns D, Krass S, Peitgen H-O, 2006. Morphological segmentation and partial volume analysis for volumetry of solid pulmonary lesions in thoracic CT scans. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 25 (4), 417– 434. 16608058
  40. Li X, Chen H, Qi X, Dou Q, Fu C-W, Heng P-A, 2018a. H-DenseUNet: Hybrid densely connected unet for liver and tumor segmentation from CT volumes. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 37 (12), 2663– 2674. 29994201
  41. Li Y, Hara S, Shimura K, 2006. A machine learning approach for locating boundaries of liver tumors in ct images. In: Null. IEEE, pp. 400– 403.
  42. Li H, Jiang G, Zhang J, Wang R, Wang Z, Zheng W-S, Menze B, 2018b. Fully convolutional network ensembles for white matter hyperintensities segmentation in MR images. NeuroImage 183, 650– 665. 30125711
  43. Ling H, Zhou SK, Zheng Y, Georgescu B, Suehling M, Comaniciu D, 2008. Hierarchical, learning-based automatic liver segmentation. In: Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2008. CVPR 2008. IEEE Conference on. IEEE, pp. 1– 8.
  44. Linguraru MG, Richbourg WJ, Liu J, Watt JM, Pamulapati V, Wang S, Summers RM, 2012. Tumor burden analysis on computed tomography by automated liver and tumor segmentation. Med. Imaging, IEEE Trans 31 (10), 1965– 1976. PMC3924860 22893379
  45. Litjens G, Kooi T, Bejnordi BE, Setio AAA, Ciompi F, Ghafoorian M, van der Laak JA, van Ginneken B, Sánchez CI, 2017. A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.05747. 28778026 · arXiv
  46. Lu F, Wu F, Hu P, Peng Z, Kong D, 2017. Automatic 3D liver location and segmentation via convolutional neural network and graph cut. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg 12 (2), 171– 182. 27604760
  47. Ma J., 2021. Cutting-edge 3D medical image segmentation methods in 2020: Are happy families all alike? arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00232. · arXiv
  48. Ma J, He J, Yang X, 2020. Learning geodesic active contours for embedding object global information in segmentation cnns. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 32897860
  49. Maier-Hein L, Reinke A, Kozubek M, Martel AL, Arbel T, Eisenmann M, Hanbury A, Jannin P, Müller H, Onogur S,, 2020. BIAS: Transparent reporting of biomedical image analysis challenges. Med. Image Anal 66, 101796. 32911207 PMC7441980
  50. Massoptier L, Casciaro S, 2007. Fully automatic liver segmentation through graph-cut technique. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2007. EMBS 2007. 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE. IEEE, pp. 5243– 5246. 18003190
  51. Massoptier L, Casciaro S, 2008. A new fully automatic and robust algorithm for fast segmentation of liver tissue and tumors from CT scans. Eur. Radiol.s 18 (8), 1658. 18369633
  52. McKnight PE, Najab J, 2010. Mann-whitney u test. In: The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. Wiley Online Library, p. 1.
  53. Mehta R, Filos A, Gal Y, Arbel T, 2020. Uncertainty evaluation metric for brain tumour segmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14262. · arXiv
  54. Milletari F, Navab N, Ahmadi S-A, 2016. V-net: Fully convolutional neural networks for volumetric medical image segmentation. In: 2016 Fourth International Conference on 3D Vision. 3DV, IEEE, pp. 565– 571.
  55. Moghbel M, Mashohor S, Mahmud R, Saripan MIB, 2017. Review of liver segmentation and computer assisted detection/diagnosis methods in computed tomography. Artif. Intell. Rev 1– 41.
  56. Moltz JH, Bornemann L, Dicken V, Peitgen H, 2008. Segmentation of liver metastases in CT scans by adaptive thresholding and morphological processing. In: MICCAI Workshop, vol. 41, (no. 43), p. 195.
  57. Moltz JH, Bornemann L, Kuhnigk J-M, Dicken V, Peitgen E, Meier S, Bolte H, Fabel M, Bauknecht H-C, Hittinger M,, 2009. Advanced segmentation techniques for lung nodules, liver metastases, and enlarged lymph nodes in CT scans. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Sign. Proces 3 (1), 122– 134.
  58. Nordlinger B, Guiguet M, Vaillant J-C, Balladur P, Boudjema K, Bachellier P, Jaeck D, 1996. Surgical resection of colorectal carcinoma metastases to the liver: A prognostic scoring system to improve case selection, based on 1568 patients. Cancer: Interdiscipl. Int. J. Am. Cancer Soc 77 (7), 1254– 1262. 8608500
  59. Nugroho HA, Ihtatho D, Nugroho H, 2008. Contrast enhancement for liver tumor identification. In: MICCAI Workshop, vol. 41, (no. 43), p. 201.
  60. Osher S, Sethian JA, 1988. Fronts propagating with curvature-dependent speed: Algorithms based on Hamilton-Jacobi formulations. J. Comput. Phys 79 (1), 12– 49.
  61. Park H, Bland PH, Meyer CR, 2003. Construction of an abdominal probabilistic atlas and its application in segmentation. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 22 (4), 483– 492. 12774894
  62. Pati S, Baid U, Zenk M, Edwards B, Sheller M, Reina GA, Foley P, Gruzdev A, Martin J, Albarqouni S,, 2021. The federated tumor segmentation (FeTS) challenge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.05874. · arXiv
  63. Puesken M, Buerke B, Gerss J, Frisch B, Beyer F, Weckesser M, Seifarth H, Heindel W, Wessling J, 2010. Prediction of lymph node manifestations in malignant lymphoma: Significant role of volumetric compared with established metric lymph node analysis in multislice computed tomography. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr 34 (4), 564– 569. 20657226
  64. Rey D, Neuhäuser M, 2011. Wilcoxon-signed-rank test. In: International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science. Springer, pp. 1658– 1659.
  65. Rieke N, Hancox J, Li W, Milletari F, Roth HR, Albarqouni S, Bakas S, Galtier MN, Landman BA, Maier-Hein K,, 2020. The future of digital health with federated learning. NPJ Digit. Med 3 (1), 1– 7. 33015372 PMC7490367
  66. Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T, 2015. U-Net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In: MICCAI, vol. 9351. pp. 234– 241.
  67. Saddi KA, Rousson M, Chefd’hotel C, Cheriet F, 2007. Global-to-local shape matching for liver segmentation in CT imaging. In: Proceedings of MICCAI Workshop on 3D Segmentation in the Clinic: A Grand Challenge. pp. 207– 214.
  68. Schoppe O, Pan C, Coronel J, Mai H, Rong Z, Todorov MI, Müskes A, Navarro F, Li H, Ertürk A,, 2020. Deep learning-enabled multi-organ segmentation in whole-body mouse scans. Nature Commun. 11 (1), 1– 14. 33159057 PMC7648799
  69. Sheller MJ, Edwards B, Reina GA, Martin J, Pati S, Kotrotsou A, Milchenko M, Xu W, Marcus D, Colen RR,, 2020. Federated learning in medicine: Facilitating multi-institutional collaborations without sharing patient data. Sci. Rep 10 (1), 1– 12. 32724046 PMC7387485
  70. Sheller MJ, Reina GA, Edwards B, Martin J, Bakas S, 2018. Multi-institutional deep learning modeling without sharing patient data: A feasibility study on brain tumor segmentation. In: International MICCAI Brainlesion Workshop. Springer, pp. 92– 104. PMC6589345 31231720
  71. Shiina S, Sato K, Tateishi R, Shimizu M, Ohama H, Hatanaka T, Takawa M, Nagamatsu H, Imai Y, 2018. Percutaneous ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison of various ablation techniques and surgery. Canad. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol 2018. PMC6008833 29974040
  72. Shimizu A, Narihira T, Furukawa D, Kobatake H, Nawano S, Shinozaki K, 2008. Ensemble segmentation using AdaBoost with application to liver lesion extraction from a CT volume. In: Proc. MICCAI Workshop on 3D Segmentation in the Clinic: A Grand Challenge II. NY, USA.
  73. Shirokikh B, Shevtsov A, Kurmukov A, Dalechina A, Krivov E, Kostjuchenko V, Golanov A, Belyaev M, 2020. Universal loss reweighting to balance lesion size inequality in 3D medical image segmentation. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, pp. 523– 532.
  74. Slagmolen P, Elen A, Seghers D, Loeckx D, Maes F, Haustermans K, 2007. Atlas based liver segmentation using nonrigid registration with a B-spline transformation model. In: Proceedings of MICCAI Workshop on 3D Segmentation in the Clinic: A Grand Challenge. pp. 197– 206.
  75. Smeets D, Stijnen B, Loeckx D, De Dobbelaer B, Suetens P, 2008. Segmentation of liver metastases using a level set method with spiral-scanning technique and supervised fuzzy pixel classification. In: MICCAI Workshop, vol. 42, p. 43.
  76. Soler L, Delingette H, Malandain G, Montagnat J, Ayache N, Koehl C, Dourthe O, Malassagne B, Smith M, Mutter D,, 2001. Fully automatic anatomical, pathological, and functional segmentation from CT scans for hepatic surgery. Comput. Aided Surg. 6 (3), 131– 142. 11747131
  77. Stewart BW, Wild CP, 2014. World cancer report 2014. In: World Heal. Organ.. Technical Report, WHO Press, World Health Organization, p. 630.
  78. Tang Y, Tang Y, Zhu Y, Xiao J, Summers RM, 2020. Ê Net: An edge enhanced network for accurate liver and tumor segmentation on CT scans. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, pp. 512– 522.
  79. Todorov M, Paetzold JC, Schoppe O, Tetteh G, Shit S, Efremov V, Todorov-Völgyi K, Düring M, Dichgans M, Piraud M,, 2020. Machine learning analysis of whole mouse brain vasculature. Nature Methods 17 (4), 442– 449. 32161395 PMC7591801
  80. Tomoshige S, Oost E, Shimizu A, Watanabe H, Nawano S, 2014. A conditional statistical shape model with integrated error estimation of the conditions; Application to liver segmentation in non-contrast CT images. Med. Image Anal 18 (1), 130– 143. 24184436
  81. Jimenez-del Toro O, Müller H, Krenn M, Gruenberg K, Taha AA, Winterstein M, Eggel I, Foncubierta-Rodríguez A, Goksel O, Jakab A,, 2016. Cloud-based evaluation of anatomical structure segmentation and landmark detection algorithms: VISCERAL anatomy benchmarks. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 35 (11), 2459– 2475. 27305669
  82. van Rikxoort E, Arzhaeva Y, van Ginneken B, 2007. Automatic segmentation of the liver in computed tomography scans with voxel classification and atlas matching. In: Proceedings of the MICCAI Workshop. Citeseer, pp. 101– 108.
  83. Virdis F, Reccia I, Di Saverio S, Tugnoli G, Kwan S, Kumar J, Atzeni J, Podda M, 2019. Clinical outcomes of primary arterial embolization in severe hepatic trauma: A systematic review. Diagn. Interv. Imaging 100 (2), 65– 75. 30555019
  84. Vorontsov E, Abi-Jaoudeh N, Kadoury S, 2014. Metastatic liver tumor segmentation using texture-based omni-directional deformable surface models. In: International MICCAI Workshop on Computational and Clinical Challenges in Abdominal Imaging. Springer, pp. 74– 83.
  85. Wang S, Cao S, Chai Z, Wei D, Ma K, Wang L, Zheng Y, 2020. Conquering data variations in resolution: A slice-aware multi-branch decoder network. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 39 (12), 4174– 4185. 32755853
  86. Wang R, Cao S, Ma K, Zheng Y, Meng D, 2021. Pairwise learning for medical image segmentation. Med. Image Anal 67, 101876. 33197863
  87. Wang X, Han S, Chen Y, Gao D, Vasconcelos N, 2019. Volumetric attention for 3D medical image segmentation and detection. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, pp. 175– 184.
  88. Wang X, Yang J, Ai D, Zheng Y, Tang S, Wang Y, 2015. Adaptive mesh expansion model (AMEM) for liver segmentation from CT image. PLoS One 10 (3), e0118064. 25769030 PMC4358832
  89. Wen J, Zhang X, Xu Y, Li Z, Liu L, 2009. Comparison of AdaBoost and logistic regression for detecting colorectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastasis. In: Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Engineering, 2009. ICBPE’09. International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 1– 6.
  90. Wiesenfarth M, Reinke A, Landman BA, Eisenmann M, Saiz LA, Cardoso MJ, Maier-Hein L, Kopp-Schneider A, 2021. Methods and open-source toolkit for analyzing and visualizing challenge results. Sci. Rep. 11 (1), 1– 15. 33504883 PMC7841186
  91. Wu W, Zhou Z, Wu S, Zhang Y, 2016. Automatic liver segmentation on volumetric CT images using supervoxel-based graph cuts. Comput. Math. Methods Med 2016. PMC4835633 27127536
  92. Xu Z, Burke RP, Lee CP, Baucom RB, Poulose BK, Abramson RG, Landman BA, 2015. Efficient multi-atlas abdominal segmentation on clinically acquired CT with SIMPLE context learning. Med. Image Anal 24 (1), 18– 27. 26046403 PMC4532551
  93. Yan K, Cai J, Zheng Y, Harrison AP, Jin D, Tang Y.-b., Tang Y-X, Huang L, Xiao J, Lu L, 2020. Learning from multiple datasets with heterogeneous and partial labels for universal lesion detection in CT. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 33370236
  94. Yang J, Wickramasinghe U, Ni B, Fua P, 2022. ImplicitAtlas: Learning deformable shape templates in medical imaging. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 15861– 15871.
  95. Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, Smith RG, Ho S, Gee JC, Gerig G, 2006. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 31 (3), 1116– 1128. 16545965
  96. Zhang F, Dvornek N, Yang J, Chapiro J, Duncan J, 2020a. Layer embedding analysis in convolutional neural networks for improved probability calibration and classification. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 39 (11), 3331– 3342. 32356739 PMC7606489
  97. Zhang L, Tanno R, Xu M-C, Jacob J, Ciccarelli O, Barkhof F, Alexander DC, 2020b. Disentangling human error from the ground truth in segmentation of medical images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.15963. · arXiv
  98. Zhang X, Tian J, Deng K, Wu Y, Li X, 2010. Automatic liver segmentation using a statistical shape model with optimal surface detection. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng 57 (10), 2622– 2626. 20615804
  99. Zhang L, Yu SC-H, 2021. Context-aware PolyUNet for liver and lesion segmentation from abdominal CT images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.11330. · arXiv
  100. Zhou B, Augenfeld Z, Chapiro J, Zhou SK, Liu C, Duncan JS, 2021a. Anatomyguided multimodal registration by learning segmentation without ground truth: Application to intraprocedural CBCT/MR liver segmentation and registration. Med. Image Anal 71, 102041. 33823397 PMC8184611
  101. Zhou X, Kitagawa T, Hara T, Fujita H, Zhang X, Yokoyama R, Kondo H, Kanematsu M, Hoshi H, 2006. Constructing a probabilistic model for automated liver region segmentation using non-contrast X-ray torso CT images. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2006. Springer, pp. 856– 863. 17354853
  102. Zhou Z, Sodha V, Pang J, Gotway MB, Liang J, 2021b. Models genesis. Med. Image Anal 67, 101840. 33188996 PMC7726094

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bilic, P., Christ, P., Li, H. B., Vorontsov, E., Ben-Cohen, A., Kaissis, G., Szeskin, A., Jacobs, C., Mamani, G. E. H., Chartrand, G., Lohöfer, F., Holch, J. W., Sommer, W., Hofmann, F., Hostettler, A., Lev-Cohain, N., Drozdzal, M., Amitai, M. M., Vivantik, R., Sosna, J., Ezhov, I., Sekuboyina, A., Navarro, F., Kofler, F., Paetzold, J. C., Shit, S., Hu, X., Lipková, J., Rempfler, M., Piraud, M., Kirschke, J., Wiestler, B., Zhang, Z., Hülsemeyer, C., Beetz, M., Ettlinger, F., Antonelli, M., Bae, W., Bellver, M., Bi, L., Chen, H., Chlebus, G., Dam, E. B., Dou, Q., Fu, C.-W., Georgescu, B., Giró-i-Nieto, X., Gruen, F., Han, X., Heng, P.-A., Hesser, J., Moltz, J. H., Igel, C., Isensee, F., Jäger, P., Jia, F., Kaluva, K. C., Khened, M., Kim, I., Kim, J.-H., Kim, S., Kohl, S., Konopczynski, T., Kori, A., Krishnamurthi, G., Li, F., Li, H., Li, J., Li, X., Lowengrub, J., Ma, J., Maier-Hein, K., Maninis, K.-K., Meine, H., Merhof, D., Pai, A., Perslev, M., Petersen, J., Pont-Tuset, J., Qi, J., Qi, X., Rippel, O., Roth, K., Sarasua, I., Schenk, A., Shen, Z., Torres, J., Wachinger, C., Wang, C., Weninger, L., Wu, J., Xu, D., Yang, X., Yu, S. C.-H., Yuan, Y., Yu, M., Zhang, L., Cardoso, J., Bakas, S., Braren, R., Heinemann, V., Pal, C., Tang, A., Kadoury, S., Soler, L., van Ginneken, B., Greenspan, H., Joskowicz, L., & Menze, B.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • Guangdong University of Foreign Studies (CN)
  • Polytechnique Montréal (CA)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • TUM Klinikum (DE)
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • German Cancer Research Center (DE)
  • LMU Klinikum (DE)
  • Institut de Recherche contre les Cancers de l’Appareil Digestif (FR)
  • Hadassah Medical Center (IL)
  • Rafael Advanced Defense Systems (Israel) (IL)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Helmholtz Munich (DE)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital (CN)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • Barcelona Supercomputing Center (ES)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Siemens Healthcare (United States) (US)
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine (DE)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IN)
  • Samsung Medical Center (KR)
  • Kakao Brain (South Korea) (KR)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • University of Bremen (DE)
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • University of Tübingen (DE)
  • Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
  • Nvidia (United States) (US)
  • Nanjing University (CN)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Corresponding author
  • Li, Hongwei Bran
  • Li, Hongchao
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
Volume
84
Pages
102680-102680
ISSN
1361-8415 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1901.04056
arXiv
1901.04056
PMC
PMC10631490
OpenAlex
W2910094941
Cited by
1,412
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 259 · 2025: 337 · 2024: 311 · 2023: 195 · 2022: 100 · 2021: 123 · 2020: 71 · 2019: 16
FWCI
77.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Medical Image Analysis (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • IRIS eCampus Telematic University (Università degli Studi eCampus) (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Fraunhofer-Publica (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
  • PolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) (submittedVersion)
  • PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB824, GSC81, subproject B12)
  • Universität Zürich
  • Fondation de l'Association des radiologistes du Québec (34939)
  • National Institutes of Health (1s10od023495-01)
  • Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé (34939, Junior 2)
  • National Cancer Institute (U01CA242871)
  • International Graduate School of Science and Engineering (GSC 81)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
liver tumor segmentation, liver segmentation, liver cancer, computed tomography, segmentation benchmark, primary liver tumors, secondary liver tumors, lesion detection, medical image segmentation
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Liver, Liver Neoplasms, Retrospective Studies, Benchmarking

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