Back

Deep learning-enabled MRI phenotyping uncovers regional body composition heterogeneity and disease associations in two European population cohorts

Mertens, C. J.; Haentze, H.; Ziegelmayer, S.; Kather, J. N.; Truhn, D.; Kim, S. H.; Busch, F.; Weller, D.; Wiestler, B.; Graf, M.; Bamberg, F.; Schlett, C. L.; Weiss, J. B.; Ringhof, S.; Can, E.; Schulz-Menger, J.; Niendorf, T.; Lammert, J.; Molwitz, I.; Kader, A.; Hering, A.; Meddeb, A.; Nawabi, J.; Schulze, M. B.; Keil, T.; Willich, S. N.; Krist, L.; Hadamitzky, M.; Hannemann, A.; Bassermann, F.; Rueckert, D.; Pischon, T.; Hapfelmeier, A.; Makowski, M. R.; Bressem, K. K.; Adams, L. C.

2025-06-06 epidemiology
10.1101/2025.06.03.25328867 medRxiv
Show abstract

Body mass index (BMI) does not account for substantial inter-individual differences in regional fat and muscle compartments, which are relevant for the prevalence of cardiometabolic and cancer conditions. We applied a validated deep learning pipeline for automated segmentation of whole-body MRI scans in 45,851 adults from the UK Biobank and German National Cohort, enabling harmonized quantification of visceral (VAT), gluteofemoral (GFAT), and abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (ASAT), liver fat fraction (LFF), and trunk muscle volume. Associations with clinical conditions were evaluated using compartment measures adjusted for age, sex, height, and BMI. Our analysis demonstrates that regional adiposity and muscle volume show distinct associations with cardiometabolic and cancer prevalence, and that substantial disease heterogeneity exists within BMI strata. The analytic framework and reference data presented here will support future risk stratification efforts and facilitate the integration of automated MRI phenotyping into large-scale population and clinical research.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.