The WORC* database: MRI and CT scans, segmentations, and clinical labels for 930 patients from six radiomics studies
Starmans, M. P. A.; Timbergen, M. J. M.; Vos, M.; Padmos, G. A.; Grünhagen, D. J.; Verhoef, C.; Sleijfer, S.; van Leenders, G. J. L. H.; Buisman, F. E.; Willemssen, F. E. J. A.; Groot Koerkamp, B.; Angus, L.; van der Veldt, A. A. M.; Rajicic, A.; Odink, A. E.; Renckens, M.; Doukas, M.; de Man, R. A.; IJzermans, J. N. M.; Miclea, R. L.; Vermeulen, P. B.; Thomeer, M. G.; Visser, J. J.; Niessen, W. J.; Klein, S.
Show abstract
The WORC database consists in total of 930 patients composed of six datasets gathered at the Erasmus MC, consisting of patients with: 1) well-differentiated liposarcoma or lipoma (115 patients); 2) desmoid-type fibromatosis or extremity soft-tissue sarcomas (203 patients); 3) primary solid liver tumors, either malignant (hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma) or benign (hepatocellular adenoma or focal nodular hyperplasia) (186 patients); 4) gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) and intra-abdominal gastrointestinal tumors radiologically resembling GISTs (246 patients); 5) colorectal liver metastases (77 patients); and 6) lung metastases of metastatic melanoma (103 patients). For each patient, either a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) scan, collected from routine clinical care, one or multiple (semi-)automatic lesion segmentations, and ground truth labels from a gold standard (e.g., pathologically proven) are available. All datasets are multicenter imaging datasets, as patients referred to our institute often received imaging at their referring hospital. The dataset can be used to validate or develop radiomics methods, i.e., using machine or deep learning to relate the visual appearance to the ground truth labels, and automatic segmentation methods. See also the research article related to this dataset: Starmans et al., Reproducible radiomics through automated machine learning validated on twelve clinical applications, Submitted. Specifications Table O_TBL View this table: org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@b12793org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@9d440corg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@dea161org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@352338org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@9b5483_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_TBL C_TBL
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Breast invasive ductal carcinoma classification on whole slide images with weakly-supervised and transfer learning 92%
- piNET: An Automated Proliferation Index Calculator Framework for Ki67 Breast Cancer Images 91%
- Use of high-plex data reveals novel insights into the tumour microenvironment of clear cell renal cell carcinoma 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Radiomic-Based Approaches in the Multi-metastatic Setting: A Quantitative Review 95%
- Detection of local microvascular proliferation in IDH wild-type Glioblastoma using relative Cerebral Blood Volume 93%
- A Large Scale Multi-dataset Investigation of Brain Metastases Distribution Based on Primary Cancer Type 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Developing a Fully Automated Imaging Biomarker for HCC Risk Assessment via MRI-Based Tumor Segmentation and EPM 93%
- An AI-based segmentation and analysis pipeline for high-field MR monitoring of cerebral organoids 92%
- Segmentation of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and surrounding vessels in CT images using deep convolutional neural networks and Texture Descriptors 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Deep-Learning-Based Generation of Synthetic High-Resolution MRI from Low-Resolution MRI for Use in Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiotherapy 92%
- Segmentation stability of human head and neck medical images for radiotherapy applications under de-identification conditions: benchmarking for data sharing and artificial intelligence use-cases 91%
- Computational analysis of pathological image enables interpretable prediction for microsatellite instability 88%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.