Automated Detection and Grading of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer at MRI via Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forest Classification
Extraprostatic extension (EPE) is well established as a significant predictor of prostate cancer aggression and recurrence. Accurate EPE assessment prior to radical prostatectomy can impact surgical approach. We aimed to utilize a deep learning-based AI workflow for automated EPE grading from prosta...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Academic radiology 2024-10, Vol.31 (10), p.4096-4106 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 4106 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 4096 |
container_title | Academic radiology |
container_volume | 31 |
creator | Simon, Benjamin D. Merriman, Katie M. Harmon, Stephanie A. Tetreault, Jesse Yilmaz, Enis C. Blake, Zoë Merino, Maria J. An, Julie Y. Marko, Jamie Law, Yan Mee Gurram, Sandeep Wood, Bradford J. Choyke, Peter L. Pinto, Peter A. Turkbey, Baris |
description | Extraprostatic extension (EPE) is well established as a significant predictor of prostate cancer aggression and recurrence. Accurate EPE assessment prior to radical prostatectomy can impact surgical approach. We aimed to utilize a deep learning-based AI workflow for automated EPE grading from prostate T2W MRI, ADC map, and High B DWI.
An expert genitourinary radiologist conducted prospective clinical assessments of MRI scans for 634 patients and assigned risk for EPE using a grading technique. The training set and held-out independent test set consisted of 507 patients and 127 patients, respectively. Existing deep-learning AI models for prostate organ and lesion segmentation were leveraged to extract area and distance features for random forest classification models. Model performance was evaluated using balanced accuracy, ROC AUCs for each EPE grade, as well as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy compared to EPE on histopathology.
A balanced accuracy score of .390 ± 0.078 was achieved using a lesion detection probability threshold of 0.45 and distance features. Using the test set, ROC AUCs for AI-assigned EPE grades 0–3 were 0.70, 0.65, 0.68, and 0.55 respectively. When using EPE≥ 1 as the threshold for positive EPE, the model achieved a sensitivity of 0.67, specificity of 0.73, and accuracy of 0.72 compared to radiologist sensitivity of 0.81, specificity of 0.62, and accuracy of 0.66 using histopathology as the ground truth.
Our AI workflow for assigning imaging-based EPE grades achieves an accuracy for predicting histologic EPE approaching that of physicians. This automated workflow has the potential to enhance physician decision-making for assessing the risk of EPE in patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer due to its consistency and automation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.acra.2024.04.011 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3047939664</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1076633224002204</els_id><sourcerecordid>3047939664</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-950bca18a2844ebd4d35e52f8902ebb5aa6e5cbebf5e8cf171931a9f427206513</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctuFDEQRS0EIiHwAyyQl2x68KvdbolNNHkQaVCiCNZWtV2NPJruHmxPBJ_BH2MzIctIJT_K18euuoS852zFGdeftitwEVaCCbViJTh_QU656UyjmNIvy5p1utFSihPyJqUtY7zVRr4mJ9LojplOnZI_54e8TJDR0wvM6HJYZgqzp9cRfJh_0GWkl79yhH1cUoYcXN3inKqunN0d00jXMDuMFDL9en9DHwKUTHLg_4FxTzcIca7ACr8vwzLRqyViynS9g5TCGBzU19-SVyPsEr57nM_I96vLb-svzeb2-mZ9vmmcZF1u-pYNDrgBYZTCwSsvW2zFaHomcBhaAI2tG3AYWzRu5B3vJYd-VKITTLdcnpGPR26p7Oeh_MNOITnc7WDG5ZCsZKrrZa-1KlJxlLpSbYo42n0ME8TfljNbrbBbW62w1QrLSvDK__DIPwwT-qcr_3tfBJ-PAixVPgSMNrmApYs-xGKE9Ut4jv8Xy6mb_g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3047939664</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Automated Detection and Grading of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer at MRI via Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forest Classification</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Simon, Benjamin D. ; Merriman, Katie M. ; Harmon, Stephanie A. ; Tetreault, Jesse ; Yilmaz, Enis C. ; Blake, Zoë ; Merino, Maria J. ; An, Julie Y. ; Marko, Jamie ; Law, Yan Mee ; Gurram, Sandeep ; Wood, Bradford J. ; Choyke, Peter L. ; Pinto, Peter A. ; Turkbey, Baris</creator><creatorcontrib>Simon, Benjamin D. ; Merriman, Katie M. ; Harmon, Stephanie A. ; Tetreault, Jesse ; Yilmaz, Enis C. ; Blake, Zoë ; Merino, Maria J. ; An, Julie Y. ; Marko, Jamie ; Law, Yan Mee ; Gurram, Sandeep ; Wood, Bradford J. ; Choyke, Peter L. ; Pinto, Peter A. ; Turkbey, Baris</creatorcontrib><description>Extraprostatic extension (EPE) is well established as a significant predictor of prostate cancer aggression and recurrence. Accurate EPE assessment prior to radical prostatectomy can impact surgical approach. We aimed to utilize a deep learning-based AI workflow for automated EPE grading from prostate T2W MRI, ADC map, and High B DWI.
An expert genitourinary radiologist conducted prospective clinical assessments of MRI scans for 634 patients and assigned risk for EPE using a grading technique. The training set and held-out independent test set consisted of 507 patients and 127 patients, respectively. Existing deep-learning AI models for prostate organ and lesion segmentation were leveraged to extract area and distance features for random forest classification models. Model performance was evaluated using balanced accuracy, ROC AUCs for each EPE grade, as well as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy compared to EPE on histopathology.
A balanced accuracy score of .390 ± 0.078 was achieved using a lesion detection probability threshold of 0.45 and distance features. Using the test set, ROC AUCs for AI-assigned EPE grades 0–3 were 0.70, 0.65, 0.68, and 0.55 respectively. When using EPE≥ 1 as the threshold for positive EPE, the model achieved a sensitivity of 0.67, specificity of 0.73, and accuracy of 0.72 compared to radiologist sensitivity of 0.81, specificity of 0.62, and accuracy of 0.66 using histopathology as the ground truth.
Our AI workflow for assigning imaging-based EPE grades achieves an accuracy for predicting histologic EPE approaching that of physicians. This automated workflow has the potential to enhance physician decision-making for assessing the risk of EPE in patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer due to its consistency and automation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1076-6332</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1878-4046</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-4046</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2024.04.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38670874</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Deep Learning ; Extraprostatic Extension ; Humans ; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; MRI ; Neoplasm Grading ; Prospective Studies ; Prostate Cancer ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology ; Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery ; Random Forest ; Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><ispartof>Academic radiology, 2024-10, Vol.31 (10), p.4096-4106</ispartof><rights>2024</rights><rights>Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-950bca18a2844ebd4d35e52f8902ebb5aa6e5cbebf5e8cf171931a9f427206513</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0853-6494</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2024.04.011$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27903,27904,45974</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38670874$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Simon, Benjamin D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merriman, Katie M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harmon, Stephanie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tetreault, Jesse</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yilmaz, Enis C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blake, Zoë</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merino, Maria J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>An, Julie Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marko, Jamie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Law, Yan Mee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gurram, Sandeep</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wood, Bradford J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choyke, Peter L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pinto, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turkbey, Baris</creatorcontrib><title>Automated Detection and Grading of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer at MRI via Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forest Classification</title><title>Academic radiology</title><addtitle>Acad Radiol</addtitle><description>Extraprostatic extension (EPE) is well established as a significant predictor of prostate cancer aggression and recurrence. Accurate EPE assessment prior to radical prostatectomy can impact surgical approach. We aimed to utilize a deep learning-based AI workflow for automated EPE grading from prostate T2W MRI, ADC map, and High B DWI.
An expert genitourinary radiologist conducted prospective clinical assessments of MRI scans for 634 patients and assigned risk for EPE using a grading technique. The training set and held-out independent test set consisted of 507 patients and 127 patients, respectively. Existing deep-learning AI models for prostate organ and lesion segmentation were leveraged to extract area and distance features for random forest classification models. Model performance was evaluated using balanced accuracy, ROC AUCs for each EPE grade, as well as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy compared to EPE on histopathology.
A balanced accuracy score of .390 ± 0.078 was achieved using a lesion detection probability threshold of 0.45 and distance features. Using the test set, ROC AUCs for AI-assigned EPE grades 0–3 were 0.70, 0.65, 0.68, and 0.55 respectively. When using EPE≥ 1 as the threshold for positive EPE, the model achieved a sensitivity of 0.67, specificity of 0.73, and accuracy of 0.72 compared to radiologist sensitivity of 0.81, specificity of 0.62, and accuracy of 0.66 using histopathology as the ground truth.
Our AI workflow for assigning imaging-based EPE grades achieves an accuracy for predicting histologic EPE approaching that of physicians. This automated workflow has the potential to enhance physician decision-making for assessing the risk of EPE in patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer due to its consistency and automation.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Deep Learning</subject><subject>Extraprostatic Extension</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>MRI</subject><subject>Neoplasm Grading</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prostate Cancer</subject><subject>Prostatectomy</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Random Forest</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><issn>1076-6332</issn><issn>1878-4046</issn><issn>1878-4046</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctuFDEQRS0EIiHwAyyQl2x68KvdbolNNHkQaVCiCNZWtV2NPJruHmxPBJ_BH2MzIctIJT_K18euuoS852zFGdeftitwEVaCCbViJTh_QU656UyjmNIvy5p1utFSihPyJqUtY7zVRr4mJ9LojplOnZI_54e8TJDR0wvM6HJYZgqzp9cRfJh_0GWkl79yhH1cUoYcXN3inKqunN0d00jXMDuMFDL9en9DHwKUTHLg_4FxTzcIca7ACr8vwzLRqyViynS9g5TCGBzU19-SVyPsEr57nM_I96vLb-svzeb2-mZ9vmmcZF1u-pYNDrgBYZTCwSsvW2zFaHomcBhaAI2tG3AYWzRu5B3vJYd-VKITTLdcnpGPR26p7Oeh_MNOITnc7WDG5ZCsZKrrZa-1KlJxlLpSbYo42n0ME8TfljNbrbBbW62w1QrLSvDK__DIPwwT-qcr_3tfBJ-PAixVPgSMNrmApYs-xGKE9Ut4jv8Xy6mb_g</recordid><startdate>20241001</startdate><enddate>20241001</enddate><creator>Simon, Benjamin D.</creator><creator>Merriman, Katie M.</creator><creator>Harmon, Stephanie A.</creator><creator>Tetreault, Jesse</creator><creator>Yilmaz, Enis C.</creator><creator>Blake, Zoë</creator><creator>Merino, Maria J.</creator><creator>An, Julie Y.</creator><creator>Marko, Jamie</creator><creator>Law, Yan Mee</creator><creator>Gurram, Sandeep</creator><creator>Wood, Bradford J.</creator><creator>Choyke, Peter L.</creator><creator>Pinto, Peter A.</creator><creator>Turkbey, Baris</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0853-6494</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241001</creationdate><title>Automated Detection and Grading of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer at MRI via Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forest Classification</title><author>Simon, Benjamin D. ; Merriman, Katie M. ; Harmon, Stephanie A. ; Tetreault, Jesse ; Yilmaz, Enis C. ; Blake, Zoë ; Merino, Maria J. ; An, Julie Y. ; Marko, Jamie ; Law, Yan Mee ; Gurram, Sandeep ; Wood, Bradford J. ; Choyke, Peter L. ; Pinto, Peter A. ; Turkbey, Baris</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-950bca18a2844ebd4d35e52f8902ebb5aa6e5cbebf5e8cf171931a9f427206513</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Deep Learning</topic><topic>Extraprostatic Extension</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>MRI</topic><topic>Neoplasm Grading</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prostate Cancer</topic><topic>Prostatectomy</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Random Forest</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Simon, Benjamin D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merriman, Katie M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harmon, Stephanie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tetreault, Jesse</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yilmaz, Enis C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blake, Zoë</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merino, Maria J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>An, Julie Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marko, Jamie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Law, Yan Mee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gurram, Sandeep</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wood, Bradford J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choyke, Peter L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pinto, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turkbey, Baris</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Academic radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Simon, Benjamin D.</au><au>Merriman, Katie M.</au><au>Harmon, Stephanie A.</au><au>Tetreault, Jesse</au><au>Yilmaz, Enis C.</au><au>Blake, Zoë</au><au>Merino, Maria J.</au><au>An, Julie Y.</au><au>Marko, Jamie</au><au>Law, Yan Mee</au><au>Gurram, Sandeep</au><au>Wood, Bradford J.</au><au>Choyke, Peter L.</au><au>Pinto, Peter A.</au><au>Turkbey, Baris</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Automated Detection and Grading of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer at MRI via Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forest Classification</atitle><jtitle>Academic radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Acad Radiol</addtitle><date>2024-10-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>4096</spage><epage>4106</epage><pages>4096-4106</pages><issn>1076-6332</issn><issn>1878-4046</issn><eissn>1878-4046</eissn><abstract>Extraprostatic extension (EPE) is well established as a significant predictor of prostate cancer aggression and recurrence. Accurate EPE assessment prior to radical prostatectomy can impact surgical approach. We aimed to utilize a deep learning-based AI workflow for automated EPE grading from prostate T2W MRI, ADC map, and High B DWI.
An expert genitourinary radiologist conducted prospective clinical assessments of MRI scans for 634 patients and assigned risk for EPE using a grading technique. The training set and held-out independent test set consisted of 507 patients and 127 patients, respectively. Existing deep-learning AI models for prostate organ and lesion segmentation were leveraged to extract area and distance features for random forest classification models. Model performance was evaluated using balanced accuracy, ROC AUCs for each EPE grade, as well as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy compared to EPE on histopathology.
A balanced accuracy score of .390 ± 0.078 was achieved using a lesion detection probability threshold of 0.45 and distance features. Using the test set, ROC AUCs for AI-assigned EPE grades 0–3 were 0.70, 0.65, 0.68, and 0.55 respectively. When using EPE≥ 1 as the threshold for positive EPE, the model achieved a sensitivity of 0.67, specificity of 0.73, and accuracy of 0.72 compared to radiologist sensitivity of 0.81, specificity of 0.62, and accuracy of 0.66 using histopathology as the ground truth.
Our AI workflow for assigning imaging-based EPE grades achieves an accuracy for predicting histologic EPE approaching that of physicians. This automated workflow has the potential to enhance physician decision-making for assessing the risk of EPE in patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer due to its consistency and automation.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>38670874</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.acra.2024.04.011</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0853-6494</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1076-6332 |
ispartof | Academic radiology, 2024-10, Vol.31 (10), p.4096-4106 |
issn | 1076-6332 1878-4046 1878-4046 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3047939664 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Aged Deep Learning Extraprostatic Extension Humans Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Male Middle Aged MRI Neoplasm Grading Prospective Studies Prostate Cancer Prostatectomy Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery Random Forest Sensitivity and Specificity |
title | Automated Detection and Grading of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer at MRI via Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forest Classification |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T14%3A13%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Automated%20Detection%20and%20Grading%20of%20Extraprostatic%20Extension%20of%20Prostate%20Cancer%20at%20MRI%20via%20Cascaded%20Deep%20Learning%20and%20Random%20Forest%20Classification&rft.jtitle=Academic%20radiology&rft.au=Simon,%20Benjamin%20D.&rft.date=2024-10-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=4096&rft.epage=4106&rft.pages=4096-4106&rft.issn=1076-6332&rft.eissn=1878-4046&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.acra.2024.04.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3047939664%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3047939664&rft_id=info:pmid/38670874&rft_els_id=S1076633224002204&rfr_iscdi=true |