TY - GEN
T1 - Evaluating Glioma Growth Predictions as a Forward Ranking Problem
AU - van Garderen, Karin A.
AU - van der Voort, Sebastian R.
AU - Wijnenga, Maarten M.J.
AU - Incekara, Fatih
AU - Kapsas, Georgios
AU - Gahrmann, Renske
AU - Alafandi, Ahmad
AU - Smits, Marion
AU - Klein, Stefan
N1 - Funding Information: Acknowledgements. This work was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (project number 11026, GLASS-NL) and the Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - The problem of tumor growth prediction is challenging, but promising results have been achieved with both model-driven and statistical methods. In this work, we present a framework for the evaluation of growth predictions that focuses on the spatial infiltration patterns, and specifically evaluating a prediction of future growth. We propose to frame the problem as a ranking problem rather than a segmentation problem. Using the average precision as a metric, we can evaluate the results with segmentations while using the full spatiotemporal prediction. Furthermore, by applying a biophysical tumor growth model to 21 patient cases we compare two schemes for fitting and evaluating predictions. By carefully designing a scheme that separates the prediction from the observations used for fitting the model, we show that a better fit of model parameters does not guarantee a better predictive power.
AB - The problem of tumor growth prediction is challenging, but promising results have been achieved with both model-driven and statistical methods. In this work, we present a framework for the evaluation of growth predictions that focuses on the spatial infiltration patterns, and specifically evaluating a prediction of future growth. We propose to frame the problem as a ranking problem rather than a segmentation problem. Using the average precision as a metric, we can evaluate the results with segmentations while using the full spatiotemporal prediction. Furthermore, by applying a biophysical tumor growth model to 21 patient cases we compare two schemes for fitting and evaluating predictions. By carefully designing a scheme that separates the prediction from the observations used for fitting the model, we show that a better fit of model parameters does not guarantee a better predictive power.
KW - Brain
KW - Glioma
KW - Growth model
KW - Magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Validation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85135060336&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08999-2_8
DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08999-2_8
M3 - Conference contribution
SN - 9783031089985
T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
SP - 100
EP - 111
BT - Brainlesion
A2 - Crimi, Alessandro
A2 - Bakas, Spyridon
PB - Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH
T2 - 7th International Brain Lesion Workshop, BrainLes 2021, held in conjunction with the Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention, MICCAI 2021
Y2 - 27 September 2021 through 27 September 2021
ER -