Study of AI algorithms on mpMRI and PHI for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Zeyu Luo, Jialei Li, Kexin Wang, Song Li, Yi Qian, Wenhua Xie, Pengsheng Wu, Xiangpeng Wang, Jun Han, Wei Zhu, Hu Wang, Yi He
{"title":"Study of AI algorithms on mpMRI and PHI for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.","authors":"Zeyu Luo, Jialei Li, Kexin Wang, Song Li, Yi Qian, Wenhua Xie, Pengsheng Wu, Xiangpeng Wang, Jun Han, Wei Zhu, Hu Wang, Yi He","doi":"10.1016/j.urolonc.2025.05.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To study the feasibility of multiple factors in improving the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study with 131 patients analyzes age, PSA, PHI and pathology. Patients with ISUP > 2 were classified as csPCa, and others are non-csPCa. The mpMRI images were processed by a homemade AI algorithm, obtaining positive or negative AI results. Four logistic regression models were fitted, with pathological findings as the dependent variable. The predicted probability of the patients was used to test the prediction efficacy of the models. The DeLong test was performed to compare differences in the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) between the models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study includes 131 patients: 62 were diagnosed with csPCa and 69 were non-csPCa. Statically significant differences were found in age, PSA, PIRADS score, AI results, and PHI values between the 2 groups (all P ≤ 0.001). The conventional model (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.389), the AI model (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.566), and the PHI model (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.515) were compared to the full model (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.626) with ANOVA and showed statistically significant differences (all P < 0.05). The AUC of the full model (0.921 [95% CI: 0.871-0.972]) was significantly higher than that of the conventional model (P = 0.001), AI model (P < 0.001), and PHI model (P = 0.014).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combining multiple factors such as age, PSA, PIRADS score and PHI, adding AI algorithm based on mpMRI, the diagnostic accuracy of csPCa can be improved.</p>","PeriodicalId":23408,"journal":{"name":"Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2025.05.007","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

Objective: To study the feasibility of multiple factors in improving the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

Methods: A retrospective study with 131 patients analyzes age, PSA, PHI and pathology. Patients with ISUP > 2 were classified as csPCa, and others are non-csPCa. The mpMRI images were processed by a homemade AI algorithm, obtaining positive or negative AI results. Four logistic regression models were fitted, with pathological findings as the dependent variable. The predicted probability of the patients was used to test the prediction efficacy of the models. The DeLong test was performed to compare differences in the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) between the models.

Results: The study includes 131 patients: 62 were diagnosed with csPCa and 69 were non-csPCa. Statically significant differences were found in age, PSA, PIRADS score, AI results, and PHI values between the 2 groups (all P ≤ 0.001). The conventional model (R2 = 0.389), the AI model (R2 = 0.566), and the PHI model (R2 = 0.515) were compared to the full model (R2 = 0.626) with ANOVA and showed statistically significant differences (all P < 0.05). The AUC of the full model (0.921 [95% CI: 0.871-0.972]) was significantly higher than that of the conventional model (P = 0.001), AI model (P < 0.001), and PHI model (P = 0.014).

Conclusion: Combining multiple factors such as age, PSA, PIRADS score and PHI, adding AI algorithm based on mpMRI, the diagnostic accuracy of csPCa can be improved.

人工智能算法在mpMRI和PHI诊断临床意义前列腺癌中的应用研究。
目的:探讨多因素对提高临床显著性前列腺癌(csPCa)诊断准确性的可行性。方法:对131例患者的年龄、PSA、PHI和病理进行回顾性分析。ISUP患者>2分为csPCa,其余为非csPCa。通过自制的人工智能算法对mpMRI图像进行处理,得到人工智能阳性或阴性结果。以病理结果为因变量,拟合4个logistic回归模型。用患者的预测概率来检验模型的预测效果。采用DeLong检验比较两种模型的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线下面积差异。结果:本研究纳入131例患者,其中62例诊断为csPCa, 69例非csPCa。两组患者年龄、PSA、PIRADS评分、AI结果、PHI值差异均有统计学意义(P≤0.001)。常规模型(R2 = 0.389)、AI模型(R2 = 0.566)、PHI模型(R2 = 0.515)与全模型(R2 = 0.626)进行方差分析,差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。全模型的AUC (0.921 [95% CI: 0.871-0.972])显著高于常规模型(P = 0.001)、AI模型(P < 0.001)和PHI模型(P = 0.014)。结论:结合年龄、PSA、PIRADS评分、PHI等多因素,加入基于mpMRI的AI算法,可提高csPCa的诊断准确率。
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
7.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations is the official journal of the Society of Urologic Oncology. The journal publishes practical, timely, and relevant clinical and basic science research articles which address any aspect of urologic oncology. Each issue comprises original research, news and topics, survey articles providing short commentaries on other important articles in the urologic oncology literature, and reviews including an in-depth Seminar examining a specific clinical dilemma. The journal periodically publishes supplement issues devoted to areas of current interest to the urologic oncology community. Articles published are of interest to researchers and the clinicians involved in the practice of urologic oncology including urologists, oncologists, and radiologists.
×
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