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
. 2024 Sep 19;11(1):1021.
doi: 10.1038/s41597-024-03814-y.

3D whole body preclinical micro-CT database of subcutaneous tumors in mice with annotations from 3 annotators

Affiliations

3D whole body preclinical micro-CT database of subcutaneous tumors in mice with annotations from 3 annotators

Malte Jensen et al. Sci Data. .

Abstract

A pivotal animal model for development of anticancer molecules is mice with subcutaneous tumors, grown by injection of xenografted tumor cells, where micro-Computed Tomography (µCT) of the mice is used to analyze the efficacy of the anticancer molecule. Manual delineation of the tumor region is necessary for the analysis, which is time-consuming and inconsistent, highlighting the need for automatic segmentation (AS) tools. This study introduces a preclinical µCT database, comprising 452 whole-body scans from 223 individual mice with subcutaneous tumors, spanning ten diverse µCT datasets conducted between 2014 and 2020 on a preclinical PET/CT scanner, making it the hitherto largest dataset of its kind. Each tumor is annotated manually by three expert annotators, allowing for robust model development. Inter-annotator agreement was analyzed, and we report an overall annotation agreement of 0.903 ± 0.046 (mean ± std) Fleiss' Kappa and a mean deviation in volume estimation of 0.015 ± 0.010 cm3 (6.9% ± 4.7), which establishes a human baseline accuracy for delineation of subcutaneous tumors, while showing good inter-annotator agreement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Example of a µCT scan for each of the 10 datasets, with an axial slice containing the tumor with and without the tumor mask overlayed in red, and a 3D Maximum Intensity Projection of the entire scan shown below the axial slices.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Sørensen-Dice coefficient across annotators on each dataset and difference in volume. Each dataset is color-coded, while the annotator pairs are indicated by the hatching: Annotator A vs. B, A vs. C and B vs. C is shown. The middle line is the median, box ends are quartiles, whiskers are 1.5 interquartile range and dots are outliers outside the 1.5 interquartile range. (a) depicts the Sørensen-Dice coefficient, (b) depicts the difference in volume estimation and (b) depicts the root mean squared error between the mean tumor volume estimated from all 3 annotators, and the volume each annotator has estimated. The metrics were calculated over the 3D tumor volumes.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Overview of the folder structure for the datasets. MXX is the mouse number and Xh or Xd is the hours or days since the first scan of the mouse, respectively.

References

    1. Rosenthal, N. & Brown, S. The mouse ascending: Perspectives for human-disease models. Nature Cell Biology9, 993–999 (2007). - PubMed
    1. Osuchowski, M. F. et al. Abandon the mouse research ship? Not just yet! Shock41, 463–475 (2014). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Perrin, S. Make mouse studies work. Nature507, 423–425 (2014). - PubMed
    1. James, M. L. & Gambhir, S. S. A molecular imaging primer: Modalities, imaging agents, and applications. Physiological Reviews92, 897–965 (2012). - PubMed
    1. Burch, R. & Russell, W. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique by W.M.S. Russell and R.L. Burch. John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (1959).

LinkOut - more resources