Table 1.
Summary of the presented concerns regarding AI application for glioblastoma MRI segmentation. Each limitation is accompanied by the domain of pertinence, the definition of the problem, and the proposed solution(s).
Section | Limitation | Domain | Definition | Possible Solution(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
2.1 | imaging heterogeneity | technical | scanner-dependent variation in image signal intensity | intensity standardization |
rescanning data | ||||
2.2 | missing MRI sequences | technical | unavaiable modality/ies (T1, T2, FLAIR, T1CE) | inter-modality translation |
knowledge distillation | ||||
2.3 | deployment issues | technical | limited computational resources and memory constraints | tiling |
quantization | ||||
2.4 | performance evaluation | technical | subjective reference standards | cross-validation |
unsupervised training | ||||
3.1 | limited number of patients | application | low number of data publicly avaiable | transfer learning |
3.2 | data quality | application | suboptimal quality of data (non-volumetric scans) | pre-processing |
inclusion of complex scenarios | ||||
3.3 | data selection | application | selection bias and reduced applicability | inclusive database |
3.4 | focus on preoperative scenario | application | logistical and technical issues for postop. MRIs | multi-modality and multi-institutional data |
4 | exclusion of molecular data | molecular | limited consideration of IDH—1p/19q—MGMT | new coder architecture |
large-scale data-sharing | ||||
5.1 | lack of standard guidelines | ethical | scientific integrity not definable | checklist |
5.2 | lack of transparency | ethical | limited understanding of the results | interpretability methods |
interdisciplinary collaboration | ||||
5.3 | privacy and data protection | ethical | difficulty to obtain complete anonimization | skull-stripping |