Practical no-gold-standard evaluation framework for quantitative imaging methods: application to lesion segmentation in positron emission tomography
暂无分享,去创建一个
Abhinav K. Jha | Arman Rahmim | Esther Mena | Brian Caffo | Saeed Ashrafinia | Eric Frey | Rathan M. Subramaniam | A. Rahmim | B. Caffo | E. Frey | R. Subramaniam | S. Ashrafinia | E. Mena
[1] Paul E Kinahan,et al. A Virtual Clinical Trial of FDG-PET Imaging of Breast Cancer: Effect of Variability on Response Assessment. , 2014, Translational oncology.
[2] Kyung Hoon Hwang,et al. Prognostic Value of Metabolic Tumor Volume Estimated by 18 F-FDG Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma of Stage II or III Disease , 2014, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
[3] Abhinav K. Jha,et al. A maximum‐likelihood method to estimate a single ADC value of lesions using diffusion MRI , 2016, Magnetic resonance in medicine.
[4] Frédérique Frouin,et al. Nonsupervised Ranking of Different Segmentation Approaches: Application to the Estimation of the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Cardiac Cine MRI Sequences , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.
[5] Matthew A Kupinski,et al. Evaluating segmentation algorithms for diffusion-weighted MR images: a task-based approach , 2010, Medical Imaging.
[6] William M. Wells,et al. Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE): an algorithm for the validation of image segmentation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.
[7] Eric Clarkson,et al. Comparing cardiac ejection fraction estimation algorithms without a gold standard. , 2006, Academic radiology.
[8] R. Wahl,et al. FDG PET/CT Imaging of Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Characteristics of Human Papillomavirus–Positive and –Negative Tumors , 2014, Clinical nuclear medicine.
[9] Habib Zaidi,et al. Comparative methods for PET image segmentation in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma , 2010, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
[10] Timothy M Pawlik,et al. Prognostic Value of FDG PET/CT-Derived Parameters in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Initial PET/CT Staging. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[11] Jong-Jin Yun,et al. A retrospective single-center study comparing clinical outcomes of 3-dimensional and 2-dimensional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis , 2019, Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery.
[12] L. R. Dice. Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association Between Species , 1945 .
[13] J. Xian,et al. Role of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters in the Evaluation of Treatment Response in Malignant Tumors , 2015, Chinese medical journal.
[14] Jayaram K. Udupa,et al. A framework for evaluating image segmentation algorithms , 2006, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph..
[15] G Dunn,et al. Modelling method comparison data , 1999, Statistical methods in medical research.
[16] Samuel Chang,et al. Predictive value of repeated F-18 FDG PET/CT parameters changes during preoperative chemoradiotherapy to predict pathologic response and overall survival in locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma patients , 2016, Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology.
[17] Eric Clarkson,et al. Estimation in medical imaging without a gold standard. , 2002, Academic radiology.
[18] Nicholas Petrick,et al. Quantitative imaging to assess tumor response to therapy: common themes of measurement, truth data, and error sources. , 2009, Translational oncology.
[19] Maximilien Vermandel,et al. Evaluation of PET volume segmentation methods: comparisons with expert manual delineations , 2012, Nuclear medicine communications.
[20] Abhinav K. Jha,et al. A no-gold-standard technique for objective assessment of quantitative nuclear-medicine imaging methods , 2016, Physics in medicine and biology.
[21] R. Köhler,et al. The International Vocabulary of Metrology, 3rd Edition: Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms. Why? How? , 2010 .
[22] Gustavo Mercier,et al. Interreader agreement and variability of FDG PET volumetric parameters in human solid tumors. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[23] Geoffrey McLennan,et al. PET/CT Assessment of Response to Therapy: Tumor Change Measurement, Truth Data, and Error. , 2009, Translational oncology.
[24] Han-Soo Kim,et al. Clinical outcome prediction of percutaneous cementoplasty for metastatic bone tumor using 18F-FDG PET-CT , 2013, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.
[25] Timo Kohlberger,et al. Evaluating Segmentation Error without Ground Truth , 2012, MICCAI.
[26] Mithat Gönen,et al. Evaluation of Different Methods of 18F-FDG-PET Target Volume Delineation in the Radiotherapy of Head and Neck Cancer , 2008, American journal of clinical oncology.
[27] Timothy Cooley,et al. Head and neck squamous cell cancer (stages III and IV) induction chemotherapy assessment: Value of FDG volumetric imaging parameters , 2014, Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology.
[28] Dimitris Visvikis,et al. Performance of automatic image segmentation algorithms for calculating total lesion glycolysis for early response monitoring in non-small cell lung cancer patients during concomitant chemoradiotherapy. , 2016, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.
[29] Ulas Bagci,et al. A review on segmentation of positron emission tomography images , 2014, Comput. Biol. Medicine.
[30] Kyle J Myers,et al. Quantitative imaging biomarkers: A review of statistical methods for computer algorithm comparisons , 2014, Statistical methods in medical research.
[31] Abhinav K. Jha,et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT Metabolic Tumor Volume and Intratumoral Heterogeneity in Pancreatic Adenocarcinomas: Impact of Dual–Time Point and Segmentation Methods , 2017, Clinical nuclear medicine.
[32] Eric C Frey,et al. Objective evaluation of reconstruction methods for quantitative SPECT imaging in the absence of ground truth , 2015, Medical Imaging.
[33] P. Jaccard. THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE FLORA IN THE ALPINE ZONE.1 , 1912 .
[34] Rathan M. Subramaniam,et al. 18F-FDG Metabolic Tumor Volume and Total Glycolytic Activity of Oral Cavity and Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Cancer: Adding Value to Clinical Staging , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.
[35] Thomas E Yankeelov,et al. Methods and challenges in quantitative imaging biomarker development. , 2015, Academic radiology.
[36] Fabrice Denis,et al. Early Assessment of Metabolic Response by 18F-FDG PET During Concomitant Radiochemotherapy of Non–Small Cell Lung Carcinoma Is Associated With Survival: A Retrospective Single-Center Study , 2015, Clinical nuclear medicine.
[37] Quynh-Thu Le,et al. Correlation between metabolic tumor volume and pathologic tumor volume in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.
[38] Federico Turkheimer,et al. Importance of Quantification for the Analysis of PET Data in Oncology: Review of Current Methods and Trends for the Future , 2012, Molecular Imaging and Biology.
[39] Daniel C. Alexander,et al. Interactive Lesion Segmentation with Shape Priors From Offline and Online Learning , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.
[40] Thomas Carlier,et al. State-Of-The-Art and Recent Advances in Quantification for Therapeutic Follow-Up in Oncology Using PET , 2015, Front. Med..
[41] John Seibyl,et al. SNM Practice Guideline for Dopamine Transporter Imaging with 123I-Ioflupane SPECT 1.0* , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.
[42] Matthew A Kupinski,et al. Diffusion MRI with Semi-Automated Segmentation Can Serve as a Restricted Predictive Biomarker of the Therapeutic Response of Liver Metastasis. , 2015, Magnetic resonance imaging.
[43] R. Subramaniam,et al. Intra-reader reliability of FDG PET volumetric tumor parameters: effects of primary tumor size and segmentation methods , 2012, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.
[44] Abhinav K. Jha,et al. Value of Intratumoral Metabolic Heterogeneity and Quantitative 18F-FDG PET/CT Parameters to Predict Prognosis in Patients With HPV-Positive Primary Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , 2017, Clinical nuclear medicine.
[45] Byeong-Cheol Ahn,et al. Prognostic implications of metabolic tumor volume on 18F-FDG PET/CT in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients with extranodal involvement , 2015 .
[46] H. Barnhart,et al. The emerging science of quantitative imaging biomarkers terminology and definitions for scientific studies and regulatory submissions , 2015, Statistical methods in medical research.
[47] Ho-Jin Shin,et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume on PET / CT in primary gastrointestinal diffuse large B cell lymphoma , 2012, Cancer science.
[48] Dong Soo Lee,et al. Total lesion glycolysis in positron emission tomography is a better predictor of outcome than the International Prognostic Index for patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma , 2013, Cancer.
[49] Matthew A Kupinski,et al. Task-based evaluation of segmentation algorithms for diffusion-weighted MRI without using a gold standard , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.
[50] Anne Bol,et al. A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
[51] Matthew A. Kupinski,et al. Objective Comparison of Quantitative Imaging Modalities Without the Use of a Gold Standard , 2001, IPMI.
[52] Gustavo Mercier,et al. FDG PET metabolic tumor volume segmentation and pathologic volume of primary human solid tumors. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[53] Abhinav K Jha,et al. A clustering algorithm for liver lesion segmentation of diffusion-weighted MR images , 2010, 2010 IEEE Southwest Symposium on Image Analysis & Interpretation (SSIAI).