Predicting brain tumour enhancement from non-contrast MR imaging with artificial intelligence: a multi-cohort retrospective diagnostic accuracy study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Brain tumour MRI typically requires both pre- and post-contrast imaging, but gadolinium is not always desirable (frequent follow-up, renal impairment, allergy, paediatric patients). We developed and validated a deep learning model to predict tumour contrast enhancement from non-contrast MRI alone. We assembled 11,089 brain MRI studies (2006-2024) from 10 datasets across four countries and three continents, spanning adult and paediatric populations with glioma, meningioma, metastases, and post-resection appearances. Three architectures were trained to detect and segment enhancing tumour from T1w, T2w and FLAIR alone. Performance was assessed in a 1,109-study held-out test set (primary endpoint: patient-level enhancement detection; secondary: voxel-level Dice). Eleven expert radiologists attempted the same task on a 564-case subset (100 cases each), blinded to history, prior imaging, and referral. The best model, nnU-Net, achieved 83.0% balanced accuracy (95% CI 79.1-87.2; sensitivity 91.5%, specificity 74.4%) for detection, with R2 = 0.859 for enhancement volume. Of enhancing cases, 76.8% reached Dice >= 0.3, 67.5% >= 0.5, and 50.2% >= 0.7. Under blinded conditions, radiologists' majority vote was lower (71.7% balanced accuracy; sensitivity 77.6%, specificity 65.8%). The proportion reaching Dice >= 0.3 varied by pathology (meningioma 93%, presurgical glioma 76%, metastases 74%, postoperative glioma 74%) and was lowest for paediatric cases (45%). Deep learning can identify contrast-enhancing brain tumours from non-contrast MRI. These models show promise as a triage or decision-support adjunct, such as in flagging studies likely to enhance so that contrast can be added to a non-contrast protocol, and may reduce gadolinium dependence in neuro-oncology imaging. Future work should optimise these models with radiologists.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Aug 2025.
Builds on
12 of 36 references.
References · 12
- 2022Swin UNETR: Swin Transformers for Semantic Segmentation of Brain Tumors in MRI Imagescited by 830
- 2021The RSNA-ASNR-MICCAI BraTS 2021 Benchmark on Brain Tumor Segmentation and Radiogenomic Classificationcited by 518
- 20183D MRI brain tumor segmentation using autoencoder regularizationcited by 328
- 2022Metrics reloaded: Recommendations for image analysis validationcited by 195
- 2024The 2024 Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) Challenge: Glioma Segmentation on Post-treatment MRIcited by 69
- 2023The Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) Challenge 2023: Glioma Segmentation in Sub-Saharan Africa Patient Population (BraTS-Africa)cited by 51
- 2021The University of California San Francisco Preoperative Diffuse Glioma MRI (UCSF-PDGM) Datasetcited by 43
- 2023The Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS-METS) Challenge 2023: Brain Metastasis Segmentation on Pre-treatment MRIcited by 36
- 2024The Impact of Scanner Domain Shift on Deep Learning Performance in Medical Imaging: an Experimental Studycited by 16
- 2024BraTS-PEDs: Results of the Multi-Consortium International Pediatric Brain Tumor Segmentation Challenge 2023cited by 11
- 2022Brain tumour segmentation with incomplete imaging datacited by 7
- 2022Representational Ethical Model Calibrationcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.