Background Independent institution-level validation of brain metastasis segmentation algorithms remains limited. We externally validated SPIRS-P1 and contextualized performance against prior algorithms and published inter-rater variability. Methods SPIRS-P1 was evaluated on 324 pre-treatment UCSF studies from 223 patients (3,449 reference-standard lesions). Per-case DSC, lesion-detection sensitivity, false positives, HD95, and NSD were evaluated by lesion size and burden. Native-space sensitivity and robustness analyses assessed dependence on preprocessing and lesion-matching definitions. Results Mean per-case DSC was 0.783 ± 0.155 (median 0.826), with 1.1 false positives per study. Sensitivity for micro, small, medium, and large lesions was 50%, 85%, 96%, and 99%, respectively; UCSF confidence intervals did not overlap Patel's internal results for micro and small lesions. Median study-level HD95 was 2.0 mm and NSD 0.936; among detected lesions, median HD95 was 1.0 mm and NSD 0.980. Native-space DSC was clinically similar to MNI-space DSC (median 0.848 vs 0.826). Conclusions SPIRS-P1 generalized well to independent UCSF data, with high sensitivity for lesions ≥125 mm³ and strong boundary agreement among detected lesions. Microlesion detection remained limited. Because the cohort contained only confirmed-positive scans, these findings support prospective evaluation as a contouring decision-support tool for known metastases but do not establish screening performance or deployment readiness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patel et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: