Table 5.
Comparison between Meier et al.'s method and the proposed method.
Method | Measurements | Dice | PPV | Sensitivity | Specificity | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ROI | Complete | Core | Enhancing | Complete | Core | Enhancing | Complete | Core | Enhancing | Complete | Core | Enhancing | |
Meier et al.;s method | HGG&LGG | 0.83 | 0.66 | 0.58 | 0.85 | 0.74 | 0.66 | 0.83 | 0.66 | 0.54 | – | – | – |
HGG | 0.84 | 0.73 | 0.68 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.72 | 0.89 | 0.70 | 0.70 | – | – | – | |
The proposed method | HGG&LGG | 0.91 | 0.62 | 0.61 | 0.93 | 0.62 | 0.64 | 0.89 | 0.62 | 0.58 | 0.75 | 0.77 | 0.92 |
HGG | 0.91 | 0.62 | 0.61 | 0.93 | 0.62 | 0.64 | 0.89 | 0.62 | 0.58 | 0.75 | 0.77 | 0.92 | |
LGG | 0.87 | 0.56 | – | 0.90 | 0.54 | – | 0.84 | 0.58 | – | 0.71 | 0.58 | – |