Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the reproducibility and replicability of studies that develop and validate segmentation methods for brain tumours on MRI and that follow established reproducibility criteria; and to evaluate whether the reporting guidelines are sufficient. METHODS: Two eligible validation studies of distinct deep learning (DL) methods were identified. We implemented the methods using published information and retraced the reported validation steps. We evaluated to what extent the description of the methods enabled reproduction of the results. We further attempted to replicate reported findings on a clinical set of images acquired at our institute consisting of high-grade and low-grade glioma (HGG, LGG), and meningioma (MNG) cases. RESULTS: We successfully reproduced one of the two tumour segmentation methods. Insufficient description of the preprocessing pipeline and our inability to replicate the pipeline resulted in failure to reproduce the second method. The replication of the first method showed promising results in terms of Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and sensitivity (Sen) on HGG cases (DSC=0.77, Sen=0.88) and LGG cases (DSC=0.73, Sen=0.83), however, poorer performance was observed for MNG cases (DSC=0.61, Sen=0.71). Preprocessing errors were identified that contributed to low quantitative scores in some cases. CONCLUSIONS: Established reproducibility criteria do not sufficiently emphasise description of the preprocessing pipeline. Discrepancies in preprocessing as a result of insufficient reporting are likely to influence segmentation outcomes and hinder clinical utilisation. A detailed description of the whole processing chain, including preprocessing, is thus necessary to obtain stronger evidence of the generalisability of DL-based brain tumour segmentation methods and to facilitate translation of the methods into clinical practice.