mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

KneePreM: Towards 3D Knee MRI Foundation Models via Large-Scale Unlabeled Pretraining and Label-Efficient Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2609.31461 ↗First posted 25 Sep 2026cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Background: Large volumes of unlabeled knee MRI scans are available across repositories but remain insufficiently leveraged. We developed KneePreM, a knee-specific 3D self-supervised model, and evaluated transfer and label efficiency for classification and segmentation. Methods: A 3D U-Net masked autoencoder was pretrained on 19,011 unlabeled Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) MRI series from 4,791 participants. Downstream fine-tuning used full and reduced training sets for fastMRI+ two-label classification (1,172 examinations), Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy (APM) eight-target classification (1,716 examinations), SKM-TEA segmentation (155 examinations), and APM segmentation (25 examinations). Baselines were random initialization and SuPreM. Deployment workflow was implemented with a Model Context Protocol interface. Evaluation metrics included balanced accuracy, F1 score, ROC AUC, PR AUC, and Dice score. Statistical analysis used bootstrap confidence intervals and paired bootstrap tests for classification and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests for segmentation. Results: KneePreM achieved higher full-data macro ROC AUC than both baselines for fastMRI+ and APM (all p < .001). For fastMRI+ classification, KneePreM achieved a ROC AUC of 0.722 using 50% of the training data, exceeding both full-data baselines. In APM classification, KneePreM reached a ROC AUC of 0.740 with 70% of the data, matching the full-data random baseline and outperforming SuPreM. For SKM-TEA segmentation, its 70%-data Dice of 0.838 exceeded the full-data random baseline (0.835) and both same-budget comparators. In APM segmentation, its 75%-data Dice of 0.746 exceeded the full-data random baseline (0.731) and both same-budget comparators. Conclusion: KneePreM improves transfer performance and label efficiency across knee MRI classification and segmentation tasks, particularly when labeled training data are limited.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2026.

Builds on

23 of 42 references.

References · 23

  1. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
  2. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 12,049
  3. 2023Segment Anythingcited by 8,234
  4. 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,974
  5. 2021Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learnerscited by 7,403
  6. 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,968
  7. 2024SAM 2: Segment Anything in Images and Videoscited by 2,863
  8. 20163D U-Net: Learning Dense Volumetric Segmentation from Sparse Annotationcited by 1,476
  9. 2021UNETR: Transformers for 3D Medical Image Segmentationcited by 959
  10. 2023ConvNeXt V2: Co-designing and Scaling ConvNets with Masked Autoencoderscited by 712
  11. 2021Self-Supervised Pre-Training of Swin Transformers for 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 422
  12. 2023A Survey on Self-supervised Learning: Algorithms, Applications, and Future Trendscited by 207
11 more
  1. 2019Models Genesis: Generic Autodidactic Models for 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 159
  2. 2023Designing BERT for Convolutional Networks: Sparse and Hierarchical Masked Modelingcited by 94
  3. 2022Masked Image Modeling Advances 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 72
  4. 2024AbdomenAtlas: A Large-Scale, Detailed-Annotated, & Multi-Center Dataset for Efficient Transfer Learning and Open Algorithmic Benchmarkingcited by 65
  5. 2022SKM-TEA: A Dataset for Accelerated MRI Reconstruction with Dense Image Labels for Quantitative Clinical Evaluationcited by 44
  6. 2024Revisiting MAE pre-training for 3D medical image segmentationcited by 35
  7. 2024Universal and Extensible Language-Vision Models for Organ Segmentation and Tumor Detection from Abdominal Computed Tomographycited by 31
  8. 2025How Well Do Supervised 3D Models Transfer to Medical Imaging Tasks?cited by 19
  9. 2024Novel adaptation of video segmentation to 3D MRI: efficient zero-shot knee segmentation with SAM2cited by 8
  10. 2025Generalist versus Specialist Vision Foundation Models for Ocular Disease and Oculomicscited by 5
  11. 2025Clinical utility of foundation models in musculoskeletal MRI for biomarker fidelity and predictive outcomescited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Knee3DVLM: Dual-Sequence Full-Volume Vision-Language Modeling for Comprehensive Knee MRI Assessment
  2. 2026OrthoDiffusion: A Generalizable Multi-Task Diffusion Foundation Model for Musculoskeletal MRI Interpretation
  3. 2026A4-MR: Abnormality-aware Anatomical Alignment for MR
  4. 2026Evaluating the Diagnostic Classification Ability of Multimodal Large Language Models: Insights from the Osteoarthritis Initiative
  5. 2026H-SemiS: Hierarchical Fusion of Semi and Self-Supervised Learning for Knee Osteoarthritis Severity Grading
  6. 2026Interpretability and Individuality in Knee MRI: Patient-Specific Radiomic Fingerprint with Reconstructed Healthy Personas
  7. 20253DReasonKnee: Advancing Grounded Reasoning in Medical Vision Language Models
  8. 2025Risk Estimation of Knee Osteoarthritis Progression via Predictive Multi-task Modelling from Efficient Diffusion Model using X-ray Images