Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Zhao, Litao
• Bao, Jie
• Qiao, Xiaomeng
• Jin, Pengfei
• Ji, Yanting
• Li, Zhenkai
• Zhang, Ji
• Su, Yueting
• Ji, Libiao
• Shen, Junkang
• Zhang, Yueyue
• Niu, Lei
• Xie, Wanfang
• Hu, Chunhong
• Shen, Hailin
• Wang, Ximing
• Liu, Jiangang
• Tian, Jie

Titel

Predicting clinically significant prostate cancer with a deep learning approach: a multicentre retrospective study

Ist Teil von

• European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2023-02, Vol.50 (3), p.727-741

Ort / Verlag

Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Erscheinungsjahr

2023

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

SpringerLink (Online service)

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Purpose This study aimed to develop deep learning (DL) models based on multicentre biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and compare the performance of these models with that of the Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment by expert radiologists based on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Methods We included 1861 consecutive male patients who underwent radical prostatectomy or biopsy at seven hospitals with mpMRI. These patients were divided into the training (1216 patients in three hospitals) and external validation cohorts (645 patients in four hospitals). PI-RADS assessment was performed by expert radiologists. We developed DL models for the classification between benign and malignant lesions (DL-BM) and that between csPCa and non-csPCa (DL-CS). An integrated model combining PI-RADS and the DL-CS model, abbreviated as PIDL-CS, was developed. The performances of the DL models and PIDL-CS were compared with that of PI-RADS. Results In each external validation cohort, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values of the DL-BM and DL-CS models were not significantly different from that of PI-RADS ( P  > 0.05), whereas the AUC of PIDL-CS was superior to that of PI-RADS ( P  < 0.05), except for one external validation cohort ( P  > 0.05). The specificity of PIDL-CS for the detection of csPCa was much higher than that of PI-RADS ( P  < 0.05). Conclusion Our proposed DL models can be a potential non-invasive auxiliary tool for predicting csPCa. Furthermore, PIDL-CS greatly increased the specificity of csPCa detection compared with PI-RADS assessment by expert radiologists, greatly reducing unnecessary biopsies and helping radiologists achieve a precise diagnosis of csPCa.