Erik Thimansson, Sophia Zackrisson, Fredrik Jäderling, Max Alterbeck, Thomas Jiborn, Anders Bjartell, Jonas Wallström
{"title":"A pilot study of AI-assisted reading of prostate MRI in Organized Prostate Cancer Testing.","authors":"Erik Thimansson, Sophia Zackrisson, Fredrik Jäderling, Max Alterbeck, Thomas Jiborn, Anders Bjartell, Jonas Wallström","doi":"10.2340/1651-226X.2024.40475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the feasibility of AI-assisted reading of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in Organized Prostate cancer Testing (OPT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective cohort study including 57 men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels ≥3 µg/L that performed bi-parametric MRI in OPT. The results of a CE-marked deep learning (DL) algorithm for prostate MRI lesion detection were compared with assessments performed by on-site radiologists and reference radiologists. Per patient PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System)/Likert scores were cross-tabulated and compared with biopsy outcomes, if performed. Positive MRI was defined as PI-RADS/Likert ≥4. Reader variability was assessed with weighted kappa scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of positive MRIs was 13 (23%), 8 (14%), and 29 (51%) for the local radiologists, expert consensus, and DL, respectively. Kappa scores were moderate for local radiologists versus expert consensus 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.74), slight for local radiologists versus DL 0.12 (95% CI: -0.07 to 0.32), and slight for expert consensus versus DL 0.17 (95% CI: -0.01 to 0.35). Out of 10 cases with biopsy proven prostate cancer with Gleason ≥3+4 the DL scored 7 as Likert ≥4.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>The Dl-algorithm showed low agreement with both local and expert radiologists. Training and validation of DL-algorithms in specific screening cohorts is essential before introduction in organized testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":7110,"journal":{"name":"Acta Oncologica","volume":"63 ","pages":"816-821"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11541807/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Oncologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/1651-226X.2024.40475","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of AI-assisted reading of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in Organized Prostate cancer Testing (OPT).
Methods: Retrospective cohort study including 57 men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels ≥3 µg/L that performed bi-parametric MRI in OPT. The results of a CE-marked deep learning (DL) algorithm for prostate MRI lesion detection were compared with assessments performed by on-site radiologists and reference radiologists. Per patient PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System)/Likert scores were cross-tabulated and compared with biopsy outcomes, if performed. Positive MRI was defined as PI-RADS/Likert ≥4. Reader variability was assessed with weighted kappa scores.
Results: The number of positive MRIs was 13 (23%), 8 (14%), and 29 (51%) for the local radiologists, expert consensus, and DL, respectively. Kappa scores were moderate for local radiologists versus expert consensus 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.74), slight for local radiologists versus DL 0.12 (95% CI: -0.07 to 0.32), and slight for expert consensus versus DL 0.17 (95% CI: -0.01 to 0.35). Out of 10 cases with biopsy proven prostate cancer with Gleason ≥3+4 the DL scored 7 as Likert ≥4.
Interpretation: The Dl-algorithm showed low agreement with both local and expert radiologists. Training and validation of DL-algorithms in specific screening cohorts is essential before introduction in organized testing.
期刊介绍:
Acta Oncologica is a journal for the clinical oncologist and accepts articles within all fields of clinical cancer research. Articles on tumour pathology, experimental oncology, radiobiology, cancer epidemiology and medical radio physics are also welcome, especially if they have a clinical aim or interest. Scientific articles on cancer nursing and psychological or social aspects of cancer are also welcomed. Extensive material may be published as Supplements, for which special conditions apply.