Radiological semantics discriminate clinically significant grade prostate cancer

被引:8
|
作者
Li, Qian [1 ,2 ]
Lu, Hong [1 ,2 ]
Choi, Jung [3 ]
Gage, Kenneth [3 ]
Feuerlein, Sebastian [3 ]
Pow-Sang, Julio M. [4 ]
Gillies, Robert [2 ,3 ]
Balagurunathan, Yoganand [3 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Tianjin Med Univ Canc Inst & Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Canc, Dept Radiol, Key Lab Canc Prevent & Therapy, Tianjin, Peoples R China
[2] HLeeMoffitt Canc Ctr, Dept Canc Physiol, Tampa, FL USA
[3] HLeeMoffitt Canc Ctr, Dept Radiol, Tampa, FL 33612 USA
[4] HLeeMoffitt Canc Ctr, Dept GenitoUrol, Tampa, FL 33612 USA
[5] HLeeMoffitt Canc, Dept Biostat & Bioinformat, Quantitat Sci, Tampa, FL 33612 USA
关键词
Prostate cancer; Pirads; Semantics; Radiological traits; GLEASON SCORE; BIOPSY; RADIOMICS; CARCINOMA; AGREEMENT; DIAGNOSIS; PITFALLS; FEATURES; LEAD; MRI;
D O I
10.1186/s40644-019-0272-y
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Identification of imaging traits to discriminate clinically significant prostate cancer is challenging due to the multi focal nature of the disease. The difficulty in obtaining a consensus by the Prostate Imaging and Data Systems (PI-RADS) scores coupled with disagreements in interpreting multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) has resulted in increased variability in reporting findings and evaluating the utility of this imaging modality in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. This study assess the ability of radiological traits (semantics) observed on multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance images (mpMRI) to discriminate clinically significant prostate cancer. Methods: We obtained multi-parametric MRI studies from 103 prostate cancer patients with 167 targeted biopsies from a single institution. The study was approved by our Institutional Review Board (IRB) for retrospective analysis. The biopsy location had been identified and marked by a clinical radiologist for targeted biopsy based on initial study interpretation. Using the target locations, two study radiologists independently re-evaluated the scans and scored 16 semantic traits on a point scale (up to 5 levels) based on mpMRI images. The semantic traits describe size, shape, and border characteristics of the prostate lesion, as well as presence of disease around lymph nodes (lymphadenopathy). We built a linear classifier model on these semantic traits and related to pathological outcome to identify clinically significant tumors (Gleason Score >= 7). The discriminatory ability of the predictors was tested using cross validation method randomly repeated and ensemble values were reported. We then compared the performance of semantic predictors with the PI-RADS predictors. Results: We found several semantic features individually discriminated high grade Gleason score (ADC-intensity, Homogeneity, early-enhancement, T2-intensity and extraprostatic extention), these univariate predictors had an average area under the receiver operator characteristics (AUROC) ranging from 0.54 to 0.68. Multivariable semantic predictors with three features (ADC-intensity; T2-intensity, enhancement homogenicity) had an average AUROC of 0.7 [0.43, 0.94]. The PI-RADS based predictor had average AUROC of 0.6 [0.47, 0.75]. Conclusion: We find semantics traits are related to pathological findings with relatively higher reproducibility between radiologists. Multivariable predictors formed on these traits shows higher discriminatory ability compared to PI-RADS scores.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Radiological semantics discriminate clinically significant grade prostate cancer
    Qian Li
    Hong Lu
    Jung Choi
    Kenneth Gage
    Sebastian Feuerlein
    Julio M. Pow-Sang
    Robert Gillies
    Yoganand Balagurunathan
    Cancer Imaging, 19
  • [2] Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection
    Li, Eric V.
    Kumar, Sai K.
    Aguiar, Jonathan A.
    Siddiqui, Mohammad R.
    Neill, Clayton
    Sun, Zequn
    Schaeffer, Edward M.
    Jawahar, Anugayathri
    Ross, Ashley E.
    Patel, Hiten D.
    BJUI COMPASS, 2024, 5 (09): : 865 - 873
  • [3] Clinically significant prostate cancer detection on MRI: A radiomic shape features study
    Cuocolo, Renato
    Stanzione, Arnaldo
    Ponsiglione, Andrea
    Romeo, Valeria
    Verde, Francesco
    Creta, Massimiliano
    La Rocca, Roberto
    Longo, Nicola
    Pace, Leonardo
    Imbriaco, Massimo
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 116 : 144 - 149
  • [4] Prostate Health Index density improves detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Tosoian, Jeffrey J.
    Druskin, Sasha C.
    Andreas, Darian
    Mullane, Patrick
    Chappidi, Meera
    Joo, Sarah
    Ghabili, Kamyar
    Mamawala, Mufaddal
    Agostino, Joseph
    Carter, Herbert B.
    Partin, Alan W.
    Sokoll, Lori J.
    Ross, Ashley E.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 120 (06) : 793 - 798
  • [5] Quantitative DCE Dynamics on Transformed MR Imaging Discriminates Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Wei, Zhouping
    Iluppangama, Malinda
    Qi, Jin
    Choi, Jung W.
    Yu, Alice
    Gage, Kenneth
    Chumbalkar, Vaibhav
    Dhilon, Jasreman
    Balaji, K. C.
    Venkataperumal, Satish
    Hernandez, David J.
    Park, Jong
    Yedjou, Clement
    Alo, Richard
    Gatenby, Robert A.
    Pow-Sang, Julio
    Balagurunanthan, Yoganand
    CANCER CONTROL, 2024, 31
  • [6] Multiparametric MRI in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2017, 18 (04) : 597 - 606
  • [7] The combination of targeted and systematic prostate biopsies is the best protocol for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Fourcade, Alexandre
    Payrard, Charlotte
    Tissot, Valentin
    Perrouin-Verbe, Marie-Aimee
    Demany, Nicolas
    Serey-Effeil, Sophie
    Callerot, Pierre
    Coquet, Jean-Baptiste
    Doucet, Laurent
    Deruelle, Charles
    Joulin, Vincent
    Nonent, Michel
    Fournier, Georges
    Valeri, Antoine
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 52 (03) : 174 - 179
  • [8] Construction and Comparison of Different Models in Detecting Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Zhou, Yongheng
    Qi, Wenqiang
    Cui, Jianfeng
    Zhong, Minglei
    Lv, Guangda
    Qu, Sifeng
    Chen, Shouzhen
    Li, Rongyang
    Shi, Benkang
    Zhu, Yaofeng
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [9] Likert vs PI-RADS v2: a comparison of two radiological scoring systems for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Khoo, Christopher C.
    Eldred-Evans, David
    Peters, Max
    Tanaka, Mariana Bertoncelli
    Noureldin, Mohamed
    Miah, Saiful
    Shah, Taimur
    Connor, Martin J.
    Reddy, Deepika
    Clark, Martin
    Lakhani, Amish
    Rockall, Andrea
    Hosking-Jervis, Feargus
    Cullen, Emma
    Arya, Manit
    Hrouda, David
    Qazi, Hasan
    Winkler, Mathias
    Tam, Henry
    Ahmed, Hashim U.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 125 (01) : 49 - 55
  • [10] Prostate Atypia: Does Repeat Biopsy Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
    Dorin, Ryan P.
    Wiener, Scott
    Harris, Cory D.
    Wagner, Joseph R.
    PROSTATE, 2015, 75 (07) : 673 - 678