Prospective Validation of an Automated Hybrid Multidimensional MRI Tool for Prostate Cancer Detection Using Targeted Biopsy: Comparison with PI-RADS-based Assessment.
IF 5.6
Q1 ONCOLOGY
Aritrick Chatterjee, Ambereen N Yousuf, Roger Engelmann, Carla Harmath, Grace Lee, Milica Medved, Ernest B Jamison, Abel Lorente Campos, Batuhan Gundogdu, Glenn Gerber, Luke F Reynolds, Parth K Modi, Tatjana Antic, Mihai Giurcanu, Scott Eggener, Gregory S Karczmar, Aytekin Oto
下载PDF
{"title":"Prospective Validation of an Automated Hybrid Multidimensional MRI Tool for Prostate Cancer Detection Using Targeted Biopsy: Comparison with PI-RADS-based Assessment.","authors":"Aritrick Chatterjee, Ambereen N Yousuf, Roger Engelmann, Carla Harmath, Grace Lee, Milica Medved, Ernest B Jamison, Abel Lorente Campos, Batuhan Gundogdu, Glenn Gerber, Luke F Reynolds, Parth K Modi, Tatjana Antic, Mihai Giurcanu, Scott Eggener, Gregory S Karczmar, Aytekin Oto","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To evaluate the use of an automated hybrid multidimensional MRI (HM-MRI)-based tool to prospectively identify prostate cancer targets before MRI/US fusion biopsy in comparison with Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI-RADS)-based multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) evaluation by expert radiologists. Materials and Methods In this prospective clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT03585660), 91 male participants (mean age, 65 years ± 8 [SD]) with known or suspected prostate cancer underwent 3-T MRI with a conventional mpMRI protocol and HM-MRI followed by subsequent biopsy between August 2018 and March 2023. Using the HM-MRI tool, tissue composition was calculated using a three-compartment model, and suspected prostate cancer regions with elevated epithelium (>40%) and reduced lumen (<20%) meeting the minimum size requirement of 25 mm<sup>2</sup> were identified. Up to two additional biopsy targets per participant were automatically selected with the HM-MRI tool in addition to the biopsy targets selected based on an expert radiologist's mpMRI interpretation (≥PI-RADS 3) using an MRI/US fusion biopsy device. Additional 12-core transrectal US-guided sextant random biopsy cores were also obtained. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (≥Gleason 3+4) was compared between HM-MRI and mpMRI by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and diagnostic accuracy metrics. Results The diagnostic performance of HM-MRI was either higher than mpMRI or showed no evidence of a difference when compared with mpMRI. On a per-participant basis, HM-MRI had significantly higher accuracy (55% vs 44%; <i>P</i> = .02) and specificity (36% vs 14%: <i>P</i> = .002) than mpMRI. On a per-lesion basis, HM-MRI had significantly higher accuracy (58% vs 39%; <i>P</i> < .001) and positive predictive value (31% vs 22%; <i>P</i> = .004) compared with mpMRI. Only one lesion was missed when using the combination of mpMRI and HM-MRI. On a per-sextant basis, HM-MRI showed significantly better performance than mpMRI for all metrics, including primary end points of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.76 vs 0.65; <i>P</i> < .001) and accuracy (83.9% vs 79.0%; <i>P</i> = .006). Conclusion This study demonstrates that HM-MRI has the potential to improve MRI/US fusion biopsy results for prostate cancer detection by providing complementary information to PI-RADS-based evaluation by expert radiologists. <b>Keywords:</b> Prostate Cancer, Hybrid Multidimensional MRI, Multiparametric MRI, PI-RADS Clinical trial registration no. NCT03585660 ©RSNA, 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e240156"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791675/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/rycan.240156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
引用
批量引用
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the use of an automated hybrid multidimensional MRI (HM-MRI)-based tool to prospectively identify prostate cancer targets before MRI/US fusion biopsy in comparison with Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI-RADS)-based multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) evaluation by expert radiologists. Materials and Methods In this prospective clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT03585660), 91 male participants (mean age, 65 years ± 8 [SD]) with known or suspected prostate cancer underwent 3-T MRI with a conventional mpMRI protocol and HM-MRI followed by subsequent biopsy between August 2018 and March 2023. Using the HM-MRI tool, tissue composition was calculated using a three-compartment model, and suspected prostate cancer regions with elevated epithelium (>40%) and reduced lumen (<20%) meeting the minimum size requirement of 25 mm2 were identified. Up to two additional biopsy targets per participant were automatically selected with the HM-MRI tool in addition to the biopsy targets selected based on an expert radiologist's mpMRI interpretation (≥PI-RADS 3) using an MRI/US fusion biopsy device. Additional 12-core transrectal US-guided sextant random biopsy cores were also obtained. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (≥Gleason 3+4) was compared between HM-MRI and mpMRI by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and diagnostic accuracy metrics. Results The diagnostic performance of HM-MRI was either higher than mpMRI or showed no evidence of a difference when compared with mpMRI. On a per-participant basis, HM-MRI had significantly higher accuracy (55% vs 44%; P = .02) and specificity (36% vs 14%: P = .002) than mpMRI. On a per-lesion basis, HM-MRI had significantly higher accuracy (58% vs 39%; P < .001) and positive predictive value (31% vs 22%; P = .004) compared with mpMRI. Only one lesion was missed when using the combination of mpMRI and HM-MRI. On a per-sextant basis, HM-MRI showed significantly better performance than mpMRI for all metrics, including primary end points of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.76 vs 0.65; P < .001) and accuracy (83.9% vs 79.0%; P = .006). Conclusion This study demonstrates that HM-MRI has the potential to improve MRI/US fusion biopsy results for prostate cancer detection by providing complementary information to PI-RADS-based evaluation by expert radiologists. Keywords: Prostate Cancer, Hybrid Multidimensional MRI, Multiparametric MRI, PI-RADS Clinical trial registration no. NCT03585660 ©RSNA, 2025.
使用靶向活检检测前列腺癌的自动混合多维MRI工具的前瞻性验证:与基于pi - rads的评估的比较。
目的评估基于自动化混合多维MRI (ham -MRI)的工具在MRI/US融合活检前前瞻性识别前列腺癌靶点的使用,并与放射科专家基于前列腺成像和报告数据系统(PI-RADS)的多参数MRI (mpMRI)评估进行比较。在这项前瞻性临床试验中(ClinicalTrials.gov注册号:NCT03585660),在2018年8月至2023年3月期间,91名已知或疑似前列腺癌的男性参与者(平均年龄65岁±8岁[SD])接受了3-T MRI、常规mpMRI方案和HM-MRI,随后进行了活检。使用HM-MRI工具,使用三室模型计算组织组成,并确定可疑的前列腺癌区域,上皮升高(>40%)和管腔减少(2)。除了使用MRI/US融合活检设备根据放射科专家的mpMRI解释(≥PI-RADS 3)选择活检目标外,每个参与者最多可使用ham -MRI工具自动选择两个额外的活检目标。另外还获得了12芯经直肠美国引导的六分仪随机活检芯。通过计算受试者工作特征曲线下面积和诊断准确性指标,比较HM-MRI和mpMRI对临床显著性前列腺癌(≥Gleason 3+4)的检出率。结果HM-MRI的诊断效能或高于mpMRI,或与mpMRI无明显差异。在每个参与者的基础上,HM-MRI具有更高的准确性(55% vs 44%;P = .02)和特异性(36% vs . 14%: P = .002)优于mpMRI。在每个病灶的基础上,HM-MRI的准确率明显更高(58% vs 39%;P < 0.001)和阳性预测值(31% vs 22%;P = .004)。mpMRI与HM-MRI联合使用时,仅遗漏1个病灶。在每六分仪的基础上,HM-MRI在所有指标上的表现都明显优于mpMRI,包括受者工作特征曲线下区域的主要终点(0.76 vs 0.65;P < 0.001)和准确率(83.9% vs 79.0%;P = .006)。结论本研究表明,HM-MRI通过为放射科专家基于pi - rad的评估提供补充信息,有可能改善MRI/US融合活检结果用于前列腺癌检测。关键词:前列腺癌,混合多维MRI,多参数MRI, PI-RADSNct03585660©rsna, 2025。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。