Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces CURVAS-PDACVI, a new open benchmark dataset for assessing vascular invasion (VI) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) using CT scans with dense annotations from five expert radiologists. They propose a multi-metric evaluation framework that incorporates probabilistic calibration and VI assessment, moving beyond simple spatial overlap. Experiments with six state-of-the-art methods reveal that high volumetric overlap doesn't guarantee reliable performance at tumor-vessel interfaces, and uncertainty-aware models demonstrate greater robustness in ambiguous cases.
Seemingly strong segmentation models can fail at clinically critical tumor-vessel interfaces, highlighting the need for uncertainty-aware AI in pancreatic cancer staging.
Surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and eligibility depends on accurate assessment of vascular invasion (VI), i.e., tumor extension into adjacent critical vessels. Despite its importance for preoperative staging and surgical planning, computational VI assessment remains underexplored. Two major challenges are the lack of public datasets and the diagnostic ambiguity at the tumor-vessel interface, which leads to substantial inter-rater variability even among expert radiologists. To address these limitations, we introduce the CURVAS-PDACVI Dataset and Challenge, an open benchmark for uncertainty-aware AI in PDAC staging based on a densely annotated dataset with five independent expert annotations per scan. We also propose a multi-metric evaluation framework that extends beyond spatial overlap to include probabilistic calibration and VI assessment. Evaluation of six state-of-the-art methods shows that strong global volumetric overlap does not necessarily translate into reliable performance at clinically critical tumor-vessel interfaces. In particular, methods optimized for binary segmentation perform competitively on average overlap metrics, but often degrade in high-complexity cases with low expert consensus, either collapsing in volume or overextending at uncertain boundaries. In contrast, methods that model inter-rater disagreement produce better calibrated probabilistic maps and show greater robustness in these ambiguous cases. The benchmark highlights the limitations of volumetric accuracy as a proxy for localized surgical utility, motivating uncertainty-aware probabilistic models for preoperative decision-making.
