Can Generative Adversarial Networks help to overcome the limited data problem in segmentation?
Automatic segmentation
Deep learning
Generative adversarial networks
Prostate cancer
Journal
Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik
ISSN: 1876-4436
Titre abrégé: Z Med Phys
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 100886455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2022
Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
28
07
2021
revised:
23
11
2021
accepted:
23
11
2021
pubmed:
22
12
2021
medline:
4
10
2022
entrez:
21
12
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
For image translational tasks, the application of deep learning methods showed that Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) architectures outperform the traditional U-Net networks, when using the same training data size. This study investigates whether this performance boost can also be expected for segmentation tasks with small training dataset size. Two models were trained on varying training dataset sizes ranging from 1-100 patients: a) U-Net and b) U-Net with patch discriminator (conditional GAN). The performance of both models to segment the male pelvis on CT-data was evaluated (Dice similarity coefficient, Hausdorff) with respect to training data size. No significant differences were observed between the U-Net and cGAN when the models were trained with the same training sizes up to 100 patients. The training dataset size had a significant impact on the models' performances, with vast improvements when increasing dataset sizes from 1 to 20 patients. When introducing GANs for the segmentation task no significant performance boost was observed in our experiments, even in segmentation models developed on small datasets.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34930685
pii: S0939-3889(21)00112-4
doi: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2021.11.006
pmc: PMC9948880
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
361-368Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier GmbH.
Références
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2020 Feb;11315:
pubmed: 32341620
Med Phys. 2014 May;41(5):050902
pubmed: 24784366
Med Image Anal. 2019 Dec;58:101552
pubmed: 31521965
Med Phys. 2020 Jun;47(5):e148-e167
pubmed: 32418337
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2021 Aug;16(8):1277-1285
pubmed: 33934313
Med Phys. 2017 May;44(5):2020-2036
pubmed: 28273355
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2019 Oct;14(10):1741-1750
pubmed: 31378841
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2021 May;68(5):1518-1526
pubmed: 33275574
Med Image Anal. 2017 Dec;42:60-88
pubmed: 28778026
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Sep;138:68-74
pubmed: 31146073
Med Image Anal. 2020 Jul;63:101693
pubmed: 32289663
Med Phys. 2020 Sep;47(9):e929-e950
pubmed: 32510603
Z Med Phys. 2020 Nov;30(4):305-314
pubmed: 32564924
Z Med Phys. 2019 May;29(2):102-127
pubmed: 30553609
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Jun;119(3):371-80
pubmed: 27162159
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jul 12;23(7):e26151
pubmed: 34255661
Phys Med Biol. 2020 Mar 03;65(5):05TR01
pubmed: 31972556
Phys Med Biol. 2018 May 04;63(9):095017
pubmed: 29633960
Med Image Anal. 2019 May;54:168-178
pubmed: 30928830
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):368-78
pubmed: 21123004
Radiother Oncol. 2020 Dec;153:55-66
pubmed: 32920005
Med Phys. 2020 Aug;47(8):3415-3422
pubmed: 32323330
Med Phys. 2019 May;46(5):2157-2168
pubmed: 30810231
Nat Methods. 2021 Feb;18(2):203-211
pubmed: 33288961
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2019 Oct;12:80-86
pubmed: 32355894
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2015 Oct;34(10):1993-2024
pubmed: 25494501
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Dec 14;63(24):245015
pubmed: 30523973
Front Public Health. 2020 May 12;8:164
pubmed: 32478029