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
. 2025 Jan;314(1):e233029.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.233029.

Automated Deep Learning-Based Detection and Segmentation of Lung Tumors at CT

Affiliations

Automated Deep Learning-Based Detection and Segmentation of Lung Tumors at CT

Mehr Kashyap et al. Radiology. 2025 Jan.

Abstract

"Just Accepted" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content. Background Detection and segmentation of lung tumors on CT scans are critical for monitoring cancer progression, evaluating treatment responses, and planning radiation therapy; however, manual delineation is labor-intensive and subject to physician variability. Purpose To develop and evaluate an ensemble deep learning model for automating identification and segmentation of lung tumors on CT scans. Materials and Methods A retrospective study was conducted between July 2019 and November 2024 using a large dataset of CT simulation scans and clinical lung tumor segmentations from radiotherapy plans. This dataset was used to train a 3D U-Net-based, image-multiresolution ensemble model to detect and segment lung tumors on CT scans. Model performance was evaluated on internal and external test sets composed of CT simulation scans and lung tumor segmentations from two affiliated medical centers, including single primary and metastatic lung tumors. Performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate, and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Model-predicted tumor volumes were compared with physician-delineated volumes. Group comparisons were made with Wilcoxon signed-rank test or one-way ANOVA. P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Results The model, trained on 1,504 CT scans with clinical lung tumor segmentations, achieved 92% sensitivity (92/100) and 82% specificity (41/50) in detecting lung tumors on the combined 150-CT scan test set. For a subset of 100 CT scans with a single lung tumor each, the model achieved a median model-physician DSC of 0.77 (IQR: 0.65-0.83) and an interphysician DSC of 0.80 (IQR: 0.72-0.86). Segmentation time was shorter for the model than for physicians (mean 76.6 vs. 166.1-187.7 seconds; p<0.001). Conclusion Routinely collected radiotherapy data were useful for model training. The key strengths of the model include a 3D U-Net ensemble approach for balancing volumetric context with resolution, robust tumor detection and segmentation performance, and the ability to generalize to an external site.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosures of conflicts of interest: M.K. No relevant relationships. X.W. No relevant relationships. N.P. No relevant relationships. M.H. No relevant relationships. Q.Z. No relevant relationships. C.H. No relevant relationships. K.B. No relevant relationships. A.C. No relevant relationships. L.K.V. Patents planned, issued, or pending with Stanford University. P.D. No relevant relationships. S.Z. No relevant relationships. B.W.L. No relevant relationships. M.D. Grants or contracts from AstraZeneca; royalties or licenses from Roche and Foresight Diagnostics; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Gritstone Bio, Illumina, and Regeneron; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bristol Myers Squibb; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Foresight Diagnostics and Regeneron; multiple patent filings on biomarkers assigned to Stanford University; board member for Foresight Diagnostics; stock or stock options from CiberMed, Foresight Diagnostics, Gritstone Bio, and Perception Medicine; and invited faculty at Hokkaido University (Japan). L.X. No relevant relationships. R.L. Grants or contracts from the National Institutes of Health and Sanofi. M.F.G. Grants or contracts to institution from Varian Medical Systems and XRad Therapeutics and stock or stock options from Roche.

Comment in

References

    1. Erasmus JJ , Gladish GW , Broemeling L , et al. . Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response . J Clin Oncol 2003. ; 21 ( 13 ): 2574 – 2582 . - PubMed
    1. Hopper KD , Kasales CJ , Van Slyke MA , Schwartz TA , TenHave TR , Jozefiak JA . Analysis of interobserver and intraobserver variability in CT tumor measurements . AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996. ; 167 ( 4 ): 851 – 854 . - PubMed
    1. Vos MJ , Uitdehaag BM , Barkhof F , et al. . Interobserver variability in the radiological assessment of response to chemotherapy in glioma . Neurology 2003. ; 60 ( 5 ): 826 – 830 . - PubMed
    1. Warr D , McKinney S , Tannock I . Influence of measurement error on assessment of response to anticancer chemotherapy: proposal for new criteria of tumor response . J Clin Oncol 1984. ; 2 ( 9 ): 1040 – 1046 . - PubMed
    1. Tang PA , Pond GR , Chen EX . Influence of an independent review committee on assessment of response rate and progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials . Ann Oncol 2010. ; 21 ( 1 ): 19 – 26 . - PubMed

MeSH terms