NoduleFlow: Automatic 3D Lung Nodule Detection and Segmentation
Organizations: Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, Universitetstorget 4, Umeå, Sweden. · Unit of Artificial Intelligence and Computer Systems, Department of Engineering, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Via Alvaro del Portillo 21, Rome, Italy. · Department of Naval, Electrical, Electronic, and Telecommunications Engineering, University of Genoa, Via Opera Pia 11A, Genoa, Italy.
Abstract
Low dose Computed Tomography (CT) is the standard imaging modality for lung cancer screening. On CT scans, lung cancer typically manifests as pulmonary nodules, whose manual identification is time-consuming and prone to observer variability, image quality limitations, and suboptimal reading conditions. Moreover, subtle temporal changes are often difficult to quantify reliably in CT scans from the same patient across follow-up examinations. Deep learning-based approaches for the automatic detection and segmentation of lung nodules have demonstrated improved accuracy and efficiency. However, most existing approaches provide only coarse region-of-interest localisation, rely on prior lesion annotations or human supervision, or treat detection and segmentation as separate tasks. In this work, we present NoduleFlow, a framework for lung nodule detection, classification, and segmentation directly from series of CT volumes. Our proposal consists of four interconnected modules and operates in an automated manner at inference time, without requiring prior lesion annotations, manual initialisation, or region-of-interest pre-selection. We further investigate whether nodule localization benefits from the propagation of candidate regions across follow-up scans through inter-scan registration fields, as opposed to conventional independent per-scan analysis. The generalisability of the framework is systematically evaluated across four independent datasets. The results underscore the potential of automated pipelines for lung nodule analysis in screening and diagnostic settings.
Figures & tables
| CPM | SEN (8FP/scan) | ||||||||
| Dataset | Selection | D-De | L-De | ENS | NNet [ 10 ] | D-De | L-De | ENS | NNet [ 10 ] |
| LongCT | all | 14.6 | 15.8 | 19.0 | 38.0 | 21.2 | 24.8 | 26.6 | 66.9 |
| Ls/scan | 23.1 | 21.8 | 26.9 | 46.1 | 30.3 | 33.9 | 36.4 | 71.3 | |
| UniToChest | all | 18.1 | 22.5 | 25.9 | 28.1 | 22.5 | 28.0 | 30.3 | 47.6 |
| Ls/scan | 66.3 | 60.6 | 72.0 | 47.4 | 69.8 | 68.2 | 75.7 | 65.4 | |
| NLST-Sybil | all | 67.6 | 48.0 | 70.9 | 44.7 | 76.1 | 63.6 | 78.9 | 76.9 |
| DSC | IoU | Hit rate | ||||||
| LongCT | UniToChest | NLST-Sybil | NLST-LongCT | |||||
| Model | ||||||||
| TS [ 29 ] | 58.8 0.8 | 80.2 0.9 | 54.4 1.8 | 74.1 1.6 | 13.7 3.2 | 17.0 1.3 | 78.0 8.0 | 12.1 3.8 |
| NNet [ 10 ] | 53.5 0.9 | 56.1 2.0 | 50.8 2.1 | 59.4 2.6 | 45.3 4.5 | 33.6 1.5 | 50.2 | 32.8 |
| S0-B | 73.4 1.1 | 60.4 2.1 | 66.1 1.6 | 66.0 2.1 | 45.9 5.0 | 36.0 1.7 | 91.0 4.6 | 24.6 5.5 |
| S0-P | 77.6 0.8 | 79.3 1.6 | 67.1 1.8 | 77.4 1.7 | 44.3 4.0 | 33.6 1.7 | 91.0 4.6 | 22.5 5.3 |