Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Aug 8:3:1241651.
doi: 10.3389/fradi.2023.1241651. eCollection 2023.

Deep learning image segmentation approaches for malignant bone lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Joseph M Rich  1 , Lokesh N Bhardwaj  1 , Aman Shah  2 , Krish Gangal  3 , Mohitha S Rapaka  4 , Assad A Oberai  5 , Brandon K K Fields  6 , George R Matcuk Jr  7 , Vinay A Duddalwar  8   9
Affiliations
Review

Deep learning image segmentation approaches for malignant bone lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Joseph M Rich et al. Front Radiol. .

Abstract

Introduction: Image segmentation is an important process for quantifying characteristics of malignant bone lesions, but this task is challenging and laborious for radiologists. Deep learning has shown promise in automating image segmentation in radiology, including for malignant bone lesions. The purpose of this review is to investigate deep learning-based image segmentation methods for malignant bone lesions on Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and Positron-Emission Tomography/CT (PET/CT).

Method: The literature search of deep learning-based image segmentation of malignant bony lesions on CT and MRI was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases following the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A total of 41 original articles published between February 2017 and March 2023 were included in the review.

Results: The majority of papers studied MRI, followed by CT, PET/CT, and PET/MRI. There was relatively even distribution of papers studying primary vs. secondary malignancies, as well as utilizing 3-dimensional vs. 2-dimensional data. Many papers utilize custom built models as a modification or variation of U-Net. The most common metric for evaluation was the dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Most models achieved a DSC above 0.6, with medians for all imaging modalities between 0.85-0.9.

Discussion: Deep learning methods show promising ability to segment malignant osseous lesions on CT, MRI, and PET/CT. Some strategies which are commonly applied to help improve performance include data augmentation, utilization of large public datasets, preprocessing including denoising and cropping, and U-Net architecture modification. Future directions include overcoming dataset and annotation homogeneity and generalizing for clinical applicability.

Keywords: CT; MRI; PET/CT; bone cancer; deep learning; image segmentation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) GM and BF declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Appearance of malignant bone lesions on different imaging modalities. (A) Sagittal T1-weighted post-contrast MR image with fat suppression of the right femur in a 32-year-old female with biopsy-proven osteosarcoma of the distal femoral metadiaphysis (arrow). (B) Sagittal chest CT with bone windows showing diffuse osseous metastatic disease (arrows) in a 72-year-old male with castration-resistant prostate cancer. (C) Sagittal vertex-to-pelvis prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT fusion image showing diffuse osseous metastatic disease (arrows) in the same patient an in (B) 6 months previously. Note that in (Β) and (C), not all metastatic lesions have been annotated with arrows.
Figure 2
Figure 2
U-Net applied to bone radiology image segmentation. Input is the medical image, and output is the segmentation mask applied to the lesion. Boxes represent vectorized outputs of convolutional and pooling operations. Arrows represent mathematical operations applied to each layer. Blue arrows are skip connections, red arrows are upsampling, yellow arrows are maxpool, black arrows are Convolution-rectified linear units (ReLU).
Figure 3
Figure 3
PRISMA flowchart of systematic literature review.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Visualization of characteristics of included studies, showing distribution according to (A) publication year; (B) imaging modality; (C) image dimensionality; (D) type of cancer.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Performance comparison with DSC by (A) publication year; (B) imaging modality; (C) image dimensionality; (D) quality of lesion (blastic vs. lytic).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Jayarangaiah A, Kemp AK, Theetha Kariyanna P. Bone metastasis [Updated 2022 Oct 25]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; (2023). Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507911/ (Cited Jun 5, 2023). - PubMed
    1. Ryan C, Stoltzfus KC, Horn S, Chen H, Louie AV, Lehrer EJ, et al. Epidemiology of bone metastases. Bone. (2022) 158:115783. 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115783 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Franchi A. Epidemiology and classification of bone tumors. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab. (2012) 9(2):92–5. PMID: 23087718; PMCID: PMC3476517. - PMC - PubMed
    1. van Beek EJ, Hoffman EA. Functional imaging: CT and MRI. Clin Chest Med. (2008) 29(1):195. vii. 10.1016/j.ccm.2007.12.003 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Heindel W, Gübitz R, Vieth V, Weckesser M, Schober O, Schäfers M. The diagnostic imaging of bone metastases. Dtsch Ärztebl Int. (2014) 111(44):741–7. 10.3238/arztebl.2014.0741 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources