scholarly journals Risk Stratification and Artificial Intelligence in Early Magnetic Resonance Imaging–based Detection of Prostate Cancer

Author(s):  
Maarten de Rooij ◽  
Hendrik van Poppel ◽  
Jelle O. Barentsz
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 1637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniël Osses ◽  
Monique Roobol ◽  
Ivo Schoots

This review discusses the most recent evidence for currently available risk stratification tools in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), and evaluates diagnostic strategies that combine these tools. Novel blood biomarkers, such as the Prostate Health Index (PHI) and 4Kscore, show similar ability to predict csPCa. Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is a urinary biomarker that has inferior prediction of csPCa compared to PHI, but may be combined with other markers like TMPRSS2-ERG to improve its performance. Original risk calculators (RCs) have the advantage of incorporating easy to retrieve clinical variables and being freely accessible as a web tool/mobile application. RCs perform similarly well as most novel biomarkers. New promising risk models including novel (genetic) markers are the SelectMDx and Stockholm-3 model (S3M). Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has evolved as an appealing tool in the diagnostic arsenal with even stratifying abilities, including in the initial biopsy setting. Merging biomarkers, RCs and MRI results in higher performances than their use as standalone tests. In the current era of prostate MRI, the way forward seems to be multivariable risk assessment based on blood and clinical parameters, potentially extended with information from urine samples, as a triaging test for the selection of candidates for MRI and biopsy.


Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 959
Author(s):  
Jasper J. Twilt ◽  
Kicky G. van Leeuwen ◽  
Henkjan J. Huisman ◽  
Jurgen J. Fütterer ◽  
Maarten de Rooij

Due to the upfront role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, a multitude of artificial intelligence (AI) applications have been suggested to aid in the diagnosis and detection of PCa. In this review, we provide an overview of the current field, including studies between 2018 and February 2021, describing AI algorithms for (1) lesion classification and (2) lesion detection for PCa. Our evaluation of 59 included studies showed that most research has been conducted for the task of PCa lesion classification (66%) followed by PCa lesion detection (34%). Studies showed large heterogeneity in cohort sizes, ranging between 18 to 499 patients (median = 162) combined with different approaches for performance validation. Furthermore, 85% of the studies reported on the stand-alone diagnostic accuracy, whereas 15% demonstrated the impact of AI on diagnostic thinking efficacy, indicating limited proof for the clinical utility of PCa AI applications. In order to introduce AI within the clinical workflow of PCa assessment, robustness and generalizability of AI applications need to be further validated utilizing external validation and clinical workflow experiments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document