Back

Apparent Anatomical Variability Through Rigid Augmentation Enables Reliable Corpus Callosum Segmentation

Guimaraes, D. M.; Szczupak, D.; Campos, V. P.; Bramati, I. E.; Silva, A. C.; Tovar-Moll, F.

2026-06-29 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.06.26.734817 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The corpus callosum is a major white matter bundle responsible for connecting both hemispheres. In mammals, due to a variety of causes, the development of the corpus callosum can be impaired - this brain malformation is known as corpus callosum dysgenesis (CCD). The clinical presentation of CCD varies, with patients exhibiting three morphological phenotypes: agenesis, partial dysgenesis, and hypoplasia. Although the first two presentations are easily detectable on MRI scans, the latter is more challenging, as the structure is fully formed but has a reduced area. In this study, we develop (1) a pipeline to generate synthetic MRI scans with apparent anatomical variation and (2) train a U-Net-based tool to automatically segment the corpus callosum of marmosets in both healthy and disease contexts. Methodologically, a custom script was devised to apply rotation and translation to T1-weighted MRI scans at the volume level. Because the slicing grid remains unchanged, these rigid transformations translate into apparent anatomical variations at the slice level. We compared corpus callosum measurements obtained from automatically segmented masks with those from manually delineated masks. The average Dice score was above 0.90, and the Hausdorff distance was below 0.4 mm. We also stratified our cohort according to phenotype (healthy controls and hypoplastic animals). The magnitude of the effect and the significance level observed between the voxel counts of healthy and hypoplastic animals using manually delineated masks were comparable to those obtained via automatic segmentations. These results show that our pipeline can generate a sufficiently varied training pool to build an accurate U-Net segmentation model with high diagnostic capability.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
NeuroImage
903 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
18.8%
2
Human Brain Mapping
329 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
9.9%
3
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 12%
6.4%
4
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
5.6%
5
Imaging Neuroscience
282 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.6%
6
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
122 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
5.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.9%
8
NeuroImage: Clinical
144 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.4%
9
Neuroinformatics
46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
10
Brain Structure and Function
93 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.5%
11
Scientific Data
209 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.3%
12
Aperture Neuro
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
13
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.8%
14
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.8%
15
Brain Informatics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
16
Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience
96 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.5%
17
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
23 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
18
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.4%
19
eneuro
439 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
20
Medical Image Analysis
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
21
Brain and Behavior
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
Frontiers in Neurology
102 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
23
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.9%
24
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
25
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
41 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%