## 3 Results  
Figure 5 shows DSCs of regions for three types of lung tumors (solid, part-solid, and pure GGO) and all types obtained from the DLS model (dense V-Net) for internal test dataset A. The DSCs for all types of tumors, solid tumors, part-solid tumors and pure GGO tumors are 0.810 \(\pm\) 0.08 (mean \(\pm\) SD), 0.828 \(\pm\) 0.08, 0.784 \(\pm\) 0.09 and 0.824 \(\pm\) 0.03. Figure 6 shows DSCs for part-solid tumor regions obtained from the DLS model for internal test dataset B and the external test dataset. The DLS model exhibited DSCs of 0.784 \(\pm\) 0.09 and 0.776 \(\pm\) 0.107 for internal test dataset B and the external test dataset, respectively. Figure 7 shows the correlation between reference and predicted CTRs with the DLS model for the internal test dataset B. The predicted CTRs showed a PCC of 0.953 and an ICC of 0.943. Figure 8 shows the Bland-Altman plot of agreement between reference and predicted CTRs for the internal test dataset B. The horizontal lines are drawn at the mean difference of 0.03, and 95% of internal test dataset B (36 of 38 cases) is within the limits of agreement. Figure 9 shows four cases that indicated the highest and lowest differences in CTR between reference and predicted CTRs. Figure 5: DSCs of regions for three types of lung tumors (solid, part solid, and pure GGO) and all types obtained using a DLS model (dense V-Net) for internal test dataset A.  
Figure 6: DSCs of part-solid tumor regions obtained by a DLS model (dense V-Net) for internal test dataset B (IN) and the external test dataset (EX). Figure 8: Bland–Altman plot of reference and predicted CTRs by the proposed model for an internal test dataset B. SD: standard deviation. Figure 7: Correlation between reference and predicted CTRs with the proposed model for an internal test dataset B. PCC: Pearson correlation coefficient, ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient. Figure 9: Four cases that indicated the lowest (**a,b**) and highest (**c,d**) differences in CTR (\(\Lambda\)CTR) between reference and predicted CTRs by the proposed model for an internal test dataset B. \(\Lambda\)CTR = 1 Reference CTR–Predicted CTR!. Green line: whole tumor contour, sky blue line: solid component contour, orange line: overlapping contour. Correlation between reference and predicted maximum diameters of both whole tumor regions and solid components and the Bland-Altman plot of agreement between reference diameters and diameters predicted with the DLS model are shown in Figures S3-S6. Figure 10 shows the correlation between reference and predicted CTRs with the dense V-Net for the external test dataset. The CTRs predicted by the dense V-Net still show a PCC of 0.926 and an ICC of 0.904. Figure 11 shows the Bland-Altman plot of agreement between reference CTRs and predicted CTRs for the external test dataset. The horizontal lines are drawn at the mean difference of 0.05 (solid line), and 92% of the external test dataset (45 of 49 cases) is within the limits of agreement (dotted lines). Correlation between the reference and predicted maximum diameters of both whole tumor regions and solid components and the Bland-Altman plot of agreement between reference diameters and diameters predicted with the proposed model with the dense V-Net are shown in Figures S7-S10. Figure 12 shows four cases that indicated the highest and lowest differences in CTR between reference and predicted CTRs. Figure 11: Bland–Altman plot of reference and predicted CTRs by the proposed model for an external test dataset. SD: standard deviation. Figure 10: Correlation between reference and predicted CTRs with the proposed model for an external test dataset. PCC: Pearson correlation coefficient, ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient. Figure 13 shows the KM curves for time to progression between low-risk and high-risk patients, who were stratified with the medians of predicted CTRs for internal test dataset B (left) and the external test dataset (right). There were statistically significant differences between the low-risk and high-risk patients.