Promptable segmentation with region exploration enables minimal-effort expert-level prostate cancer delineation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Purpose: Accurate segmentation of prostate cancer on magnetic resonance (MR) images is crucial for planning image-guided interventions such as targeted biopsies, cryoablation, and radiotherapy. However, subtle and variable tumour appearances, differences in imaging protocols, and limited expert availability make consistent interpretation difficult. While automated methods aim to address this, they rely on large expertly-annotated datasets that are often inconsistent, whereas manual delineation remains labour-intensive. This work aims to bridge the gap between automated and manual segmentation through a framework driven by user-provided point prompts, enabling accurate segmentation with minimal annotation effort. Methods: The framework combines reinforcement learning (RL) with a region-growing segmentation process guided by user prompts. Starting from an initial point prompt, region-growing generates a preliminary segmentation, which is iteratively refined through RL. At each step, the RL agent observes the image and current segmentation to predict a new point, from which region growing updates the mask. A reward, balancing segmentation accuracy and voxel-wise uncertainty, encourages exploration of ambiguous regions, allowing the agent to escape local optima and perform sample-specific optimisation. Despite requiring fully supervised training, the framework bridges manual and fully automated segmentation at inference by substantially reducing user effort while outperforming current fully automated methods. Results: The framework was evaluated on two public prostate MR datasets (PROMIS and PICAI, with 566 and 1090 cases). It outperformed the previous best automated methods by 9.9% and 8.9%, respectively, with performance comparable to manual radiologist segmentation, reducing annotation time tenfold.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2026.
Builds on
20 of 34 references.
References · 20
- 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
- 2023Segment Anythingcited by 8,158
- 2024SAM 2: Segment Anything in Images and Videoscited by 2,784
- 2025DINOv3cited by 1,297
- 2025SAM 3: Segment Anything with Conceptscited by 835
- 2022Swin UNETR: Swin Transformers for Semantic Segmentation of Brain Tumors in MRI Imagescited by 823
- 2019The Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS)cited by 504
- 2023Segment Anything in Medical Imagescited by 226
- 2023CLIP-Driven Universal Model for Organ Segmentation and Tumor Detectioncited by 224
- 2019The state of the art in kidney and kidney tumor segmentation in contrast-enhanced CT imaging: Results of the KiTS19 Challengecited by 188
- 2025MedSAM2: Segment Anything in 3D Medical Images and Videoscited by 88
8 more
- 2021Is segmentation uncertainty useful?cited by 37
- 2025MedSAM3: Delving into Segment Anything with Medical Conceptscited by 25
- 2019Multiple Landmark Detection using Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 23
- 2022Mitigating Dataset Bias by Using Per-sample Gradientcited by 21
- 2023Automated 3D Segmentation of Kidneys and Tumors in MICCAI KiTS 2023 Challengecited by 19
- 2023Combiner and HyperCombiner Networks: Rules to Combine Multimodality MR Images for Prostate Cancer Localisationcited by 10
- 2024T2-Only Prostate Cancer Prediction by Meta-Learning from Bi-Parametric MR Imagingcited by 4
- 2025Promptable cancer segmentation using minimal expert-curated datacited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.