In this part, we provide detailed descriptions of previous abdominal organ segmentation datasets. The introductions of multi-organs Datasets will be developed in Sec. Annotations from the existing datasets are used if available. Acquisition details are different for each institution since they follow different clinical protocols in the clinical scenario. Images were reconstructed at the 2.5-5 mm section thickness with a standard FC08 convolutional kernel and a 400-500 mm reconstruction diameter.

Automatic segmentation of brain tumors in intra-operative ultrasound (iUS) images could facilitate localization of tumor tissue during resection surgery. The lack of large annotated datasets limits the current models performances. In this paper, we investigate the use of tumor annotations in pre-operative MRI images, which are more easily accessible than annotations in iUS images, for training of deep learning models for iUS brain tumor segmentation. We used 180 annotated pre-operative MRI images with corresponding unannotated iUS images, and 29 annotated iUS images. Image registration was performed to transfer the MRI annotations to the corresponding iUS images before training models with the nnU-Net framework. To validate the use of MRI labels, the models were compared to a model trained with only US annotated tumors, and a model with both US and MRI annotated tumors. In addition, the results were compared to annotations validated by an expert neurosurgeon on the same test set to measure inter-observer variability. The results showed similar performance for a model trained with only MRI annotated tumors, compared to a model trained with only US annotated tumors. The model trained using both modalities obtained slightly better results with an average Dice score of 0.62, where external expert annotations achieved a score of 0.67. The results also showed that the deep learning models were comparable to expert annotation for larger tumors (> 200 mm2), but perform clearly worse for smaller tumors (< 200 mm2). This shows that MRI tumor annotations can be used as a substitute for US tumor annotations to train a deep learning model for automatic brain tumor segmentation in intra-operative ultrasound images. Small tumors is a limitation for the current models and will be the focus of future work. The main models are available here: https://github.com/mathildefaanes/us_brain_tumor_segmentation.

The absence of adequately sufficient expert-level tumor annotations hinders the effectiveness of supervised learning based opportunistic cancer screening on medical imaging. Clinical reports (that are rich in descriptive textual details) can offer a "free lunch'' supervision information and provide tumor location as a type of weak label to cope with screening tasks, thus saving human labeling workloads, if properly leveraged. However, predicting cancer only using such weak labels can be very changeling since tumors are usually presented in small anatomical regions compared to the whole 3D medical scans. Weakly semi-supervised learning (WSSL) utilizes a limited set of voxel-level tumor annotations and incorporates alongside a substantial number of medical images that have only off-the-shelf clinical reports, which may strike a good balance between minimizing expert annotation workload and optimizing screening efficacy. In this paper, we propose a novel text-guided learning method to achieve highly accurate cancer detection results. Through integrating diagnostic and tumor location text prompts into the text encoder of a vision-language model (VLM), optimization of weakly supervised learning can be effectively performed in the latent space of VLM, thereby enhancing the stability of training. Our approach can leverage clinical knowledge by large-scale pre-trained VLM to enhance generalization ability, and produce reliable pseudo tumor masks to improve cancer detection. Our extensive quantitative experimental results on a large-scale cancer dataset, including 1,651 unique patients, validate that our approach can reduce human annotation efforts by at least 70% while maintaining comparable cancer detection accuracy to competing fully supervised methods (AUC value 0.961 versus 0.966).