Self-Supervised Learning (SSL) presents an exciting opportunity to unlock the potential of vast, untapped clinical datasets, for various downstream applications that suffer from the scarcity of labeled data. While SSL has revolutionized fields like natural language processing and computer vision, its adoption in 3D medical image computing has been limited by three key pitfalls: Small pre-training dataset sizes, architectures inadequate for 3D medical image analysis, and insufficient evaluation practices. In this paper, we address these issues by i) leveraging a large-scale dataset of 39k 3D brain MRI volumes and ii) using a Residual Encoder U-Net architecture within the state-of-the-art nnU-Net framework. iii) A robust development framework, incorporating 5 development and 8 testing brain MRI segmentation datasets, allowed performance-driven design decisions to optimize the simple concept of Masked Auto Encoders (MAEs) for 3D CNNs. The resulting model not only surpasses previous SSL methods but also outperforms the strong nnU-Net baseline by an average of approximately 3 Dice points setting a new state-of-the-art. Our code and models are made available here.

Identifying predictive covariates, which forecast individual treatment effectiveness, is crucial for decision-making across different disciplines such as personalized medicine. These covariates, referred to as biomarkers, are extracted from pretreatment data, often within randomized controlled trials, and should be distinguished from prognostic biomarkers, which are independent of treatment assignment. Our study focuses on discovering predictive imaging biomarkers, specific image features, by leveraging pretreatment images to uncover new causal relationships. Unlike laborintensive approaches relying on handcrafted features prone to bias, we present a novel task of directly learning predictive features from images. We propose an evaluation protocol to assess a model's ability to identify predictive imaging biomarkers and differentiate them from purely prognostic ones by employing statistical testing and a comprehensive analysis of image feature attribution. We explore the suitability of deep learning models originally developed for estimating the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) for this task, which have been assessed primarily for their precision of CATE estimation while overlooking the evaluation of imaging biomarker discovery. Our proof-of-concept analysis demonstrates the feasibility and potential of our approach in discovering and validating predictive imaging biomarkers from synthetic outcomes and real-world image datasets. Our code is available at https://github.com/MIC-DKFZ/predictive_image_biomarker_analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Breast diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) has shown potential as a standalone imaging technique for certain indications, eg, supplemental screening of women with dense breasts. This study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system for clinical interpretation and workload reduction in breast DWI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective IRB-approved study included: n = 824 examinations for model development (2017-2020) and n = 235 for evaluation (01/2021-06/2021). Readings were performed by three readers using either the AI-CAD or manual readings. BI-RADS-like (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) classification was based on DWI. Histopathology served as ground truth. The model was nnDetection-based, trained using 5-fold cross-validation and ensembling. Statistical significance was determined using McNemar's test. Inter-rater agreement was calculated using Cohen's kappa. Model performance was calculated using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). RESULTS: The AI-augmented approach significantly reduced BI-RADS-like 3 calls in breast DWI by 29% (P =.019) and increased interrater agreement (0.57 ± 0.10 vs 0.49 ± 0.11), while preserving diagnostic accuracy. Two of the three readers detected more malignant lesions (63/69 vs 59/69 and 64/69 vs 62/69) with the AI-CAD. The AI model achieved an AUC of 0.78 (95% CI: [0.72, 0.85]; P <.001), which increased for women at screening age to 0.82 (95% CI: [0.73, 0.90]; P <.001), indicating a potential for workload reduction of 20.9% at 96% sensitivity. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Breast DWI might benefit from AI support. In our study, AI showed potential for reduction of BI-RADS-like 3 calls and increase of inter-rater agreement. However, given the limited study size, further research is needed.

Current deep learning-based solutions for image analysis tasks are commonly incapable of handling problems to which multiple different plausible solutions exist. In response, posterior-based methods such as conditional Diffusion Models and Invertible Neural Networks have emerged; however, their translation is hampered by a lack of research on adequate validation. In other words, the way progress is measured often does not reflect the needs of the driving practical application. Closing this gap in the literature, we present the first systematic framework for the application-driven validation of posterior-based methods in inverse problems. As a methodological novelty, it adopts key principles from the field of object detection validation, which has a long history of addressing the question of how to locate and match multiple object instances in an image. Treating modes as instances enables us to perform mode-centric validation, using well-interpretable metrics from the application perspective. We demonstrate the value of our framework through instantiations for a synthetic toy example and two medical vision use cases: pose estimation in surgery and imaging-based quantification of functional tissue parameters for diagnostics. Our framework offers key advantages over common approaches to posterior validation in all three examples and could thus revolutionize performance assessment in inverse problems.

Domain gaps are significant obstacles to the clinical implementation of machine learning (ML) solutions for medical image analysis. Although current research emphasizes new training methods and network architectures, the specific impact of prevalence shifts on algorithms in real-world applications is often overlooked. Differences in class frequencies between development and deployment data are crucial, particularly for the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence (AI), as disease prevalence can vary greatly across different times and locations. Our contribution is threefold. Based on a diverse set of 30 medical classification tasks (1) we demonstrate that lack of prevalence shift handling can have severe consequences on the quality of calibration, decision threshold, and performance assessment. Furthermore, (2) we show that prevalences can be accurately and reliably estimated in a data-driven manner. Finally, (3) we propose a new workflow for prevalence-aware image classification that uses estimated deployment prevalences to adjust a trained classifier to a new environment, without requiring additional annotated deployment data. Comprehensive experiments indicate that our proposed approach could contribute to generating better classifier decisions and more reliable performance estimates compared to current practice.

Semantic segmentation is an essential component of medical image analysis research, with recent deep learning algorithms offering out-of-the-box applicability across diverse datasets. Despite these advancements, segmentation failures remain a significant concern for real-world clinical applications, necessitating reliable detection mechanisms. This paper introduces a comprehensive benchmarking framework aimed at evaluating failure detection methodologies within medical image segmentation. Through our analysis, we identify the strengths and limitations of current failure detection metrics, advocating for the risk-coverage analysis as a holistic evaluation approach. Utilizing a collective dataset comprising five public 3D medical image collections, we assess the efficacy of various failure detection strategies under realistic test-time distribution shifts. Our findings highlight the importance of pixel confidence aggregation and we observe superior performance of the pairwise Dice score (Roy et al., 2019) between ensemble predictions, positioning it as a simple and robust baseline for failure detection in medical image segmentation. To promote ongoing research, we make the benchmarking framework available to the community.

Uncertainty estimation is an essential and heavily-studied component for the reliable application of semantic segmentation methods. While various studies exist claiming methodological advances on the one hand, and successful application on the other hand, the field is currently hampered by a gap between theory and practice leaving fundamental questions unanswered: Can data-related and model-related uncertainty really be separated in practice? Which components of an uncertainty method are essential for real-world performance? Which uncertainty method works well for which application? In this work, we link this research gap to a lack of systematic and comprehensive evaluation of uncertainty methods. Specifically, we identify three key pitfalls in current literature and present an evaluation framework that bridges the research gap by providing 1) a controlled environment for studying data ambiguities as well as distribution shifts, 2) systematic ablations of relevant method components, and 3) test-beds for the five predominant uncertainty applications: OoD-detection, active learning, failure detection, calibration, and ambiguity modeling. Empirical results on simulated as well as real-world data demonstrate how the proposed framework is able to answer the predominant questions in the field revealing for instance that 1) separation of uncertainty types works on simulated data but does not necessarily translate to real-world data, 2) aggregation of scores is a crucial but currently neglected component of uncertainty methods, 3) While ensembles are performing most robustly across the different downstream tasks and settings, test-time augmentation often constitutes a light-weight alternative. Code is at: https://github.com/IML-DKFZ/values

How can we test AI performance? This question seems trivial, but it isn't. Standard benchmarks often have problems such as in-distribution and small-size test sets, oversimplified metrics, unfair comparisons, and short-term outcome pressure. As a consequence, good performance on standard benchmarks does not guarantee success in real-world scenarios. To address these problems, we present Touchstone, a large-scale collaborative segmentation benchmark of 9 types of abdominal organs. This benchmark is based on 5,195 training CT scans from 76 hospitals around the world and 5,903 testing CT scans from 11 additional hospitals. This diverse test set enhances the statistical significance of benchmark results and rigorously evaluates AI algorithms across various out-of-distribution scenarios. We invited 14 inventors of 19 AI algorithms to train their algorithms, while our team, as a third party, independently evaluated these algorithms on three test sets. In addition, we also evaluated pre-existing AI frameworks---which, differing from algorithms, are more flexible and can support different algorithms—including MONAI from NVIDIA, nnU-Net from DKFZ, and numerous other open-source frameworks. We are committed to expanding this benchmark to encourage more innovation of AI algorithms for the medical domain.

Explainable AI (XAI) is a rapidly growing domain with a myriad of proposed methods as well as metrics aiming to evaluate their efficacy. However, current studies are often of limited scope, examining only a handful of XAI methods and ignoring underlying design parameters for performance, such as the model architecture or the nature of input data. Moreover, they often rely on one or a few metrics and neglect thorough validation, increasing the risk of selection bias and ignoring discrepancies among metrics. These shortcomings leave practitioners confused about which method to choose for their problem. In response, we introduce LATEC, a large-scale benchmark that critically evaluates 17 prominent XAI methods using 20 distinct metrics. We systematically incorporate vital design parameters like varied architectures and diverse input modalities, resulting in 7,560 examined combinations. Through LATEC, we showcase the high risk of conflicting metrics leading to unreliable rankings and consequently propose a more robust evaluation scheme. Further, we comprehensively evaluate various XAI methods to assist practitioners in selecting appropriate methods aligning with their needs. Curiously, the emerging top-performing method, Expected Gradients, is not examined in any relevant related study. LATEC reinforces its role in future XAI research by publicly releasing all 326k saliency maps and 378k metric scores as a (meta-)evaluation dataset. The benchmark is hosted at: https://github.com/IML-DKFZ/latec.

Selective Classification, wherein models can reject low-confidence predictions, promises reliable translation of machine-learning based classification systems to real-world scenarios such as clinical diagnostics. While current evaluation of these systems typically assumes fixed working points based on pre-defined rejection thresholds, methodological progress requires benchmarking the general performance of systems akin to the $\mathrm{AUROC}$ in standard classification. In this work, we define 5 requirements for multi-threshold metrics in selective classification regarding task alignment, interpretability, and flexibility, and show how current approaches fail to meet them. We propose the Area under the Generalized Risk Coverage curve ($\mathrm{AUGRC}$), which meets all requirements and can be directly interpreted as the average risk of undetected failures. We empirically demonstrate the relevance of $\mathrm{AUGRC}$ on a comprehensive benchmark spanning 6 data sets and 13 confidence scoring functions. We find that the proposed metric substantially changes metric rankings on 5 out of the 6 data sets.

Despite the remarkable success of deep learning systems over the last decade, a key difference still remains between neural network and human decision-making: As humans, we can not only form a decision on the spot, but also ponder, revisiting an initial guess from different angles, distilling relevant information, arriving at a better decision. Here, we propose RecycleNet, a latent feature recycling method, instilling the pondering capability for neural networks to refine initial decisions over a number of recycling steps, where outputs are fed back into earlier network layers in an iterative fashion. This approach makes minimal assumptions about the neural network architecture and thus can be implemented in a wide variety of contexts. Using medical image segmentation as the evaluation environment, we show that latent feature recycling enables the network to iteratively refine initial predictions even beyond the iterations seen during training, converging towards an improved decision. We evaluate this across a variety of segmentation benchmarks and show consistent improvements even compared with top-performing segmentation methods. This allows trading increased computation time for improved performance, which can be beneficial, especially for safety-critical applications.

Interactive segmentation is a crucial research area in medical image analysis aiming to boost the efficiency of costly annotations by incorporating human feedback. This feedback takes the form of clicks, scribbles, or masks and allows for iterative refinement of the model output so as to efficiently guide the system towards the desired behavior. In recent years, deep learning-based approaches have propelled results to a new level causing a rapid growth in the field with 121 methods proposed in the medical imaging domain alone. In this review, we provide a structured overview of this emerging field featuring a comprehensive taxonomy, a systematic review of existing methods, and an in-depth analysis of current practices. Based on these contributions, we discuss the challenges and opportunities in the field. For instance, we find that there is a severe lack of comparison across methods which needs to be tackled by standardized baselines and benchmarks.

International benchmarking competitions have become fundamental for the comparative performance assessment of image analysis methods. However, little attention has been given to investigating what can be learnt from these competitions. Do they really generate scientific progress? What are common and successful participation strategies? What makes a solution superior to a competing method? To address this gap in the literature, we performed a multicenter study with all 80 competitions that were conducted in the scope of IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021. Statistical analyses performed based on comprehensive descriptions of the submitted algorithms linked to their rank as well as the underlying participation strategies revealed common characteristics of winning solutions. These typically include the use of multi-task learning (63%) and/or multi-stage pipelines (61%), and a focus on augmentation (100%), image preprocessing (97%), data curation (79%), and post-processing (66%). The “typical” lead of a winning team is a computer scientist with a doctoral degree, five years of experience in biomedical image analysis, and four years of experience in deep learning. Two core general development strategies stood out for highly-ranked teams: the reflection of the metrics in the method design and the focus on analyzing and handling failure cases. According to the organizers, 43% of the winning algorithms exceeded the state of the art but only 11% completely solved the respective domain problem. The insights of our study could help researchers (1) improve algorithm development strategies when approaching new problems, and (2) focus on open research questions revealed by this work.

Active Learning (AL) aims to reduce the labeling burden by interactively selecting the most informative samples from a pool of unlabeled data. While there has been extensive research on improving AL query methods in recent years, some studies have questioned the effectiveness of AL compared to emerging paradigms such as semi-supervised (Semi-SL) and self-supervised learning (Self-SL), or a simple optimization of classifier configurations. Thus, today’s AL literature presents an inconsistent and contradictory landscape, leaving practitioners uncertain about whether and how to use AL in their tasks. In this work, we make the case that this inconsistency arises from a lack of systematic and realistic evaluation of AL methods. Specifically, we identify five key pitfalls in the current literature that reflect the delicate considerations required for AL evaluation. Further, we present an evaluation framework that overcomes these pitfalls and thus enables meaningful statements about the performance of AL methods. To demonstrate the relevance of our protocol, we present a large-scale empirical study and benchmark for image classification spanning various data sets, query methods, AL settings, and training paradigms. Our findings clarify the inconsistent picture in the literature and enable us to give hands-on recommendations for practitioners. The benchmark is hosted at https://github.com/IML-DKFZ/realistic-al.

In this work, we report the set-up and results of the Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS), which was organized in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2017 and the International Conferences on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2017 and 2018. The image dataset is diverse and contains primary and secondary tumors with varied sizes and appearances with various lesion-to-background levels (hyper-/hypo-dense), created in collaboration with seven hospitals and research institutions. Seventy-five submitted liver and liver tumor segmentation algorithms were trained on a set of 131 computed tomography (CT) volumes and were tested on 70 unseen test images acquired from different patients. We found that not a single algorithm performed best for both liver and liver tumors in the three events. The best liver segmentation algorithm achieved a Dice score of 0.963, whereas, for tumor segmentation, the best algorithms achieved Dices scores of 0.674 (ISBI 2017), 0.702 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.739 (MICCAI 2018). Retrospectively, we performed additional analysis on liver tumor detection and revealed that not all top-performing segmentation algorithms worked well for tumor detection. The best liver tumor detection method achieved a lesion-wise recall of 0.458 (ISBI 2017), 0.515 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.554 (MICCAI 2018), indicating the need for further research. LiTS remains an active benchmark and resource for research, e.g., contributing the liver-related segmentation tasks in http://medicaldecathlon.com/. In addition, both data and online evaluation are accessible via https://competitions.codalab.org/competitions/17094.

Detecting Out-of-Distribution (OoD) data is one of the greatest challenges in safe and robust deployment of machine learning algorithms in medicine. When the algorithms encounter cases that deviate from the distribution of the training data, they often produce incorrect and over-confident predictions. OoD detection algorithms aim to catch erroneous predictions in advance by analysing the data distribution and detecting potential instances of failure. Moreover, flagging OoD cases may support human readers in identifying incidental findings. Due to the increased interest in OoD algorithms, benchmarks for different domains have recently been established. In the medical imaging domain, for which reliable predictions are often essential, an open benchmark has been missing. We introduce the Medical-Out-Of-Distribution-Analysis-Challenge (MOOD) as an open, fair, and unbiased benchmark for OoD methods in the medical imaging domain. The analysis of the submitted algorithms shows that performance has a strong positive correlation with the perceived difficulty, and that all algorithms show a high variance for different anomalies, making it yet hard to recommend them for clinical practice. We also see a strong correlation between challenge ranking and performance on a simple toy test set, indicating that this might be a valuable addition as a proxy dataset during anomaly detection algorithm development.

Neural Processes (NPs) are a family of conditional generative models that are able to model a distribution over functions, in a way that allows them to perform predictions at test time conditioned on a number of context points. A recent addition to this family, Convolutional Conditional Neural Processes (ConvCNP), have shown remarkable improvement in performance over prior art, but we find that they sometimes struggle to generalize when applied to time series data. In particular, they are not robust to distribution shifts and fail to extrapolate observed patterns into the future. By incorporating a Gaussian Process into the model, we are able to remedy this and at the same time improve performance within distribution. As an added benefit, the Gaussian Process reintroduces the possibility to sample from the model, a key feature of other members in the NP family.

Delineation of the left ventricular cavity, myocardium, and right ventricle from cardiac magnetic resonance images (multi-slice 2-D cine MRI) is a common clinical task to establish diagnosis. The automation of the corresponding tasks has thus been the subject of intense research over the past decades. In this paper, we introduce the "Automatic Cardiac Diagnosis Challenge" dataset (ACDC), the largest publicly available and fully annotated dataset for the purpose of cardiac MRI (CMR) assessment. The dataset contains data from 150 multi-equipments CMRI recordings with reference measurements and classification from two medical experts. The overarching objective of this paper is to measure how far state-of-the-art deep learning methods can go at assessing CMRI, i.e., segmenting the myocardium and the two ventricles as well as classifying pathologies. In the wake of the 2017 MICCAI-ACDC challenge, we report results from deep learning methods provided by nine research groups for the segmentation task and four groups for the classification task. Results show that the best methods faithfully reproduce the expert analysis, leading to a mean value of 0.97 correlation score for the automatic extraction of clinical indices and an accuracy of 0.96 for automatic diagnosis. These results clearly open the door to highly accurate and fully automatic analysis of cardiac CMRI. We also identify scenarios for which deep learning methods are still failing. Both the dataset and detailed results are publicly available online, while the platform will remain open for new submissions.