Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates glioma subregion segmentation in MRI, indicating HC-U-Net improves accuracy and efficiency.
Precise delineation of glioma subregions in multimodal MRI is vital for clinical decision-making, yet remains difficult because of tumor heterogeneity, pronounced class imbalance, and the very limited size of the Enhancing Tumor (ET). While 3D U-Net variants with attention and multi-scale modules have advanced the field, Most existing approaches handle the Whole Tumor (WT), Tumor Core (TC), and ET as separate categories, overlooking their natural anatomical hierarchy (WT → TC → ET). To address this, we propose HC-U-Net, a novel hierarchical cascade framework that explicitly models this anatomical dependency through a progressive three-stage segmentation strategy (WT → TC → ET). The proposed framework integrates three dedicated 3D U-Net experts, each designed for a distinct hierarchical stage: (1) A lightweight expert for robust WT localization; (2) A CBAM-3D-enhanced expert that uses the WT probability map to focus attention on refining the TC boundaries; (3) A multi-scale expert equipped with an ASPP-3D module, integrating WT and TC maps to perform the final four-class segmentation with enriched contextual reasoning. Each expert is trained in isolation to maintain stability and optimize memory usage. The key contribution of HC-U-Net is its targeted integration of attention and multi-scale mechanisms within a strict anatomical cascade, enabling progressive refinement from global to local structures. Comprehensive evaluations on the BraTS 2020 dataset show that our method establishes a new benchmark in balancing accuracy and efficiency, achieving mean Dice scores of 0.917, 0.857, and 0.812 for WT, TC, and ET, respectively. Importantly, it achieves a 10.5% relative gain in ET Dice over a conventional 3D U-Net baseline. The results validate that explicitly encoding hierarchical relationships, combined with stage-specific feature enhancement, is highly effective for precise glioma subregion segmentation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
MYR et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: