Skip to main content

Table 3 Quantitative metrics used for assessment of the four individual segmentation methods, the average of four segmentation results (AveSeg) and the consensus method (ConSeg) for the simulated phantom studies including respiratory motion

From: Does consensus contours improve robustness and accuracy on \(^{18}\)F-FDG PET imaging tumor delineation?

Method

MATV(cm\(^3\))

RE(%)

DSC

Rectangle mask

MASAC

20.15 (15.18, 21.48)

− 18.36 (− 40.52, 5.24)

0.79 (0.74, 0.86)

AP

10.78 (6.80, 15.59)

− 54.27 (− 57.38, − 50.36)

0.63 (0.60, 0.65)

ST

14.51 (9.70, 21.23)

− 38.76 (− 41.79, − 35.03)

0.75 (0.73, 0.77)

41MAX

14.43 (9.62, 21.40)

− 38.28 (− 41.74, − 33.87)

0.76 (0.73, 0.77)

AveSeg

14.83 (11.38, 19.91)

− 41.61 (− 42.65, − 31.03)

0.73 (0.72, 0.74)

ConSeg

13.93 (9.54, 19.82)

− 42.95 (− 45.06, − 41.96)

0.73 (0.71, 0.73)

Irregular mask

MASAC

16.17 (13.85, 22.48)

− 35.17 (− 45.10, − 17.74)

0.78 (0.71, 0.83)

AP

18.41 (13.10, 26.54)

− 22.67 (− 26.63, − 20.60)

0.83 (0.82, 0.85)

ST

14.51 (9.62, 21.23)

− 38.76 (− 41.79, − 36.05)

0.75 (0.74, 0.77)

41MAX

14.43 (9.54, 21.40)

− 38.28 (− 42.00, − 35.03)

0.76 (0.73, 0.78)

AveSeg

15.88 (11.47, 22.91)

− 35.83(− 37.21, − 30.53)

0.77 (0.77, 0.78)

ConSeg

14.51 (9.62, 21.32)

− 38.52 (− 41.74, − 36.05)

0.76 (0.74, 0.78)