Diagnostic Utility of Artificial Intelligence-assisted Transperineal Biopsy Planning in Prostate Cancer Suspected Men: A Prospective Cohort Study.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Karsten Guenzel, Georg Lukas Baumgaertner, Anwar R Padhani, Johannes Luckau, Uwe Carsten Lock, Tomasz Ozimek, Stefan Heinrich, Jakob Schlegel, Jonas Busch, Ahmed Magheli, Julian Struck, Hendrik Borgmann, Tobias Penzkofer, Bernd Hamm, Stefan Hinz, Charlie Alexander Hamm
{"title":"Diagnostic Utility of Artificial Intelligence-assisted Transperineal Biopsy Planning in Prostate Cancer Suspected Men: A Prospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Karsten Guenzel, Georg Lukas Baumgaertner, Anwar R Padhani, Johannes Luckau, Uwe Carsten Lock, Tomasz Ozimek, Stefan Heinrich, Jakob Schlegel, Jonas Busch, Ahmed Magheli, Julian Struck, Hendrik Borgmann, Tobias Penzkofer, Bernd Hamm, Stefan Hinz, Charlie Alexander Hamm","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2024.04.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Accurate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reporting is essential for transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) planning. Although approved computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) tools may assist urologists in this task, evidence of improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to document the diagnostic utility of using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and CAD for biopsy planning compared with PI-RADS alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 262 consecutive men scheduled for TPB at our referral centre were analysed. Reported PI-RADS lesions and an US Food and Drug Administration-cleared CAD tool were used for TPB planning. PI-RADS and CAD lesions were targeted on TPB, while four (interquartile range: 2-5) systematic biopsies were taken. The outcomes were the (1) proportion of csPCa (grade group ≥2) and (2) number of targeted lesions and false-positive rate. Performance was tested using free-response receiver operating characteristic curves and the exact Fisher-Yates test.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Overall, csPCa was detected in 56% (146/262) of men, with sensitivity of 92% and 97% (p = 0.007) for PI-RADS- and CAD-directed TPB, respectively. In 4% (10/262), csPCa was detected solely by CAD-directed biopsies; in 8% (22/262), additional csPCa lesions were detected. However, the number of targeted lesions increased by 54% (518 vs 336) and the false-positive rate doubled (0.66 vs 1.39; p = 0.009). Limitations include biopsies only for men at clinical/radiological suspicion and no multidisciplinary review of MRI before biopsy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>The tested CAD tool for TPB planning improves csPCa detection at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>The computer-aided diagnosis tool tested for transperineal prostate biopsy planning improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.04.007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: Accurate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reporting is essential for transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) planning. Although approved computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) tools may assist urologists in this task, evidence of improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to document the diagnostic utility of using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and CAD for biopsy planning compared with PI-RADS alone.

Methods: A total of 262 consecutive men scheduled for TPB at our referral centre were analysed. Reported PI-RADS lesions and an US Food and Drug Administration-cleared CAD tool were used for TPB planning. PI-RADS and CAD lesions were targeted on TPB, while four (interquartile range: 2-5) systematic biopsies were taken. The outcomes were the (1) proportion of csPCa (grade group ≥2) and (2) number of targeted lesions and false-positive rate. Performance was tested using free-response receiver operating characteristic curves and the exact Fisher-Yates test.

Key findings and limitations: Overall, csPCa was detected in 56% (146/262) of men, with sensitivity of 92% and 97% (p = 0.007) for PI-RADS- and CAD-directed TPB, respectively. In 4% (10/262), csPCa was detected solely by CAD-directed biopsies; in 8% (22/262), additional csPCa lesions were detected. However, the number of targeted lesions increased by 54% (518 vs 336) and the false-positive rate doubled (0.66 vs 1.39; p = 0.009). Limitations include biopsies only for men at clinical/radiological suspicion and no multidisciplinary review of MRI before biopsy.

Conclusions and clinical implications: The tested CAD tool for TPB planning improves csPCa detection at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.

Patient summary: The computer-aided diagnosis tool tested for transperineal prostate biopsy planning improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.

人工智能辅助经会阴活检规划对前列腺癌疑似患者的诊断效用:前瞻性队列研究
背景和目的:准确的磁共振成像(MRI)报告对于经会阴前列腺活检(TPB)计划至关重要。尽管已获批准的计算机辅助诊断 (CAD) 工具可以帮助泌尿科医生完成这项任务,但目前还缺乏证据表明临床意义重大的前列腺癌 (csPCa) 检测得到了改善。因此,我们旨在记录使用前列腺成像报告和数据系统(PI-RADS)和计算机辅助诊断系统(CAD)制定活检计划与仅使用 PI-RADS 相比的诊断效用:方法:分析了在我们的转诊中心计划进行前列腺活检的 262 名男性患者。在制定 TPB 计划时使用了 PI-RADS 病变报告和美国食品药品管理局批准的 CAD 工具。PI-RADS和CAD病变是TPB的目标,同时进行了4次(四分位间范围:2-5次)系统活检。结果为:(1) csPCa(等级组≥2)的比例;(2) 目标病变的数量和假阳性率。使用自由响应接收器操作特征曲线和精确的 Fisher-Yates 检验对结果进行了检验:总体而言,56% 的男性(146/262)检测到了 csPCa,PI-RADS 和 CAD 引导的 TPB 敏感性分别为 92% 和 97% (p = 0.007)。4%的患者(10/262)仅通过 CAD 导向活检发现了 csPCa;8%的患者(22/262)发现了额外的 csPCa 病变。但是,目标病变的数量增加了 54%(518 对 336),假阳性率增加了一倍(0.66 对 1.39;p = 0.009)。局限性包括仅对临床/放射学怀疑的男性进行活检,以及活检前未对 MRI 进行多学科审查:经测试的用于 TPB 计划的 CAD 工具提高了 csPCa 的检测率,但代价是增加了取样病灶的数量和假阳性。患者总结:经会阴前列腺活检计划中测试的计算机辅助诊断工具提高了具有临床意义的前列腺癌的检出率,但代价是增加了病灶取样数量和假阳性率。根据泌尿外科医生和患者的偏好,这可能会使活检计划更加个性化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European urology focus
European urology focus Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU). EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信