1
|
Maki JH, Patel NU, Ulrich EJ, Dhaouadi J, Jones RW. Part I: prostate cancer detection, artificial intelligence for prostate cancer and how we measure diagnostic performance: a comprehensive review. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2024; 53:606-613. [PMID: 38658286 DOI: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.04.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2024] [Revised: 03/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/18/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024]
Abstract
MRI has firmly established itself as a mainstay for the detection, staging and surveillance of prostate cancer. Despite its success, prostate MRI continues to suffer from poor inter-reader variability and a low positive predictive value. The recent emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to potentially improve diagnostic performance shows great potential. Understanding and interpreting the AI landscape as well as ever-increasing research literature, however, is difficult. This is in part due to widely varying study design and reporting techniques. This paper aims to address this need by first outlining the different types of AI used for the detection and diagnosis of prostate cancer, next deciphering how data collection methods, statistical analysis metrics (such as ROC and FROC analysis) and end points/outcomes (lesion detection vs. case diagnosis) affect the performance and limit the ability to compare between studies. Finally, this work explores the need for appropriately enriched investigational datasets and proper ground truth, and provides guidance on how to best conduct AI prostate MRI studies. Published in parallel, a clinical study applying this suggested study design was applied to review and report a multiple-reader multiple-case clinical study of 150 bi-parametric prostate MRI studies across nine readers, measuring physician performance both with and without the use of a recently FDA cleared Artificial Intelligence software.1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey H Maki
- University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Department of Radiology, 12401 E 17th Ave (MS L954), Aurora, Colorado, USA.
| | - Nayana U Patel
- University of New Mexico Department of Radiology, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zhao C, Duan Y, Yang D. Contour interpolation by deep learning approach. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2022; 9:064003. [PMID: 36569410 PMCID: PMC9768435 DOI: 10.1117/1.jmi.9.6.064003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Contour interpolation is an important tool for expediting manual segmentation of anatomical structures. The process allows users to manually contour on discontinuous slices and then automatically fill in the gaps, therefore saving time and efforts. The most used conventional shape-based interpolation (SBI) algorithm, which operates on shape information, often performs suboptimally near the superior and inferior borders of organs and for the gastrointestinal structures. In this study, we present a generic deep learning solution to improve the robustness and accuracy for contour interpolation, especially for these historically difficult cases. Approach A generic deep contour interpolation model was developed and trained using 16,796 publicly available cases from 5 different data libraries, covering 15 organs. The network inputs were a 128 × 128 × 5 image patch and the two-dimensional contour masks for the top and bottom slices of the patch. The outputs were the organ masks for the three middle slices. The performance was evaluated on both dice scores and distance-to-agreement (DTA) values. Results The deep contour interpolation model achieved a dice score of 0.95 ± 0.05 and a mean DTA value of 1.09 ± 2.30 mm , averaged on 3167 testing cases of all 15 organs. In a comparison, the results by the conventional SBI method were 0.94 ± 0.08 and 1.50 ± 3.63 mm , respectively. For the difficult cases, the dice score and DTA value were 0.91 ± 0.09 and 1.68 ± 2.28 mm by the deep interpolator, compared with 0.86 ± 0.13 and 3.43 ± 5.89 mm by SBI. The t-test results confirmed that the performance improvements were statistically significant ( p < 0.05 ) for all cases in dice scores and for small organs and difficult cases in DTA values. Ablation studies were also performed. Conclusions A deep learning method was developed to enhance the process of contour interpolation. It could be useful for expediting the tasks of manual segmentation of organs and structures in the medical images.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chenxi Zhao
- University of Missouri, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, Columbia, Missouri, United States
| | - Ye Duan
- University of Missouri, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, Columbia, Missouri, United States
| | - Deshan Yang
- Duke University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham, North Carolina, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Finnegan RN, Reynolds HM, Ebert MA, Sun Y, Holloway L, Sykes JR, Dowling J, Mitchell C, Williams SG, Murphy DG, Haworth A. A statistical, voxelised model of prostate cancer for biologically optimised radiotherapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 21:136-145. [PMID: 35284663 PMCID: PMC8913349 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.02.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2021] [Revised: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Radiation therapy (RT) is commonly indicated for treatment of prostate cancer (PC). Biologicallyoptimised RT for PC may improve disease-free survival. This requires accurate spatial localisation and characterisation of tumour lesions. We aimed to generate a statistical, voxelised biological model to complement in vivomultiparametric MRI data to facilitate biologically-optimised RT. Material and methods Ex vivo prostate MRI and histopathological imaging were acquired for 63 PC patients. These data were co-registered to derive three-dimensional distributions of graded tumour lesions and cell density. Novel registration processes were used to map these data to a common reference geometry. Voxelised statistical models of tumour probability and cell density were generated to create the PC biological atlas. Cell density models were analysed using the Kullback-Leibler divergence to compare normal vs. lognormal approximations to empirical data. Results A reference geometry was constructed using ex vivo MRI space, patient data were deformably registered using a novel anatomy-guided process. Substructure correspondence was maintained using peripheral zone definitions to address spatial variability in prostate anatomy between patients. Three distinct approaches to interpolation were designed to map contours, tumour annotations and cell density maps from histology into ex vivo MRI space. Analysis suggests a log-normal model provides a more consistent representation of cell density when compared to a linear-normal model. Conclusion A biological model has been created that combines spatial distributions of tumour characteristics from a population into three-dimensional, voxelised, statistical models. This tool will be used to aid the development of biologically-optimised RT for PC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert N Finnegan
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- InghamInstitute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Hayley M Reynolds
- Auckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Martin A Ebert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
- School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
- 5D Clinics, Claremont, Western Australia, Australia
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Yu Sun
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Lois Holloway
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- InghamInstitute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
- South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jonathan R Sykes
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sydney West Radiation Oncology Network, Blacktown Cancer & Haematology Centre, Blacktown, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sydney West Radiation Oncology Network, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jason Dowling
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
- CSIRO Health and Biosecurity, The Australian e-Health and Research Centre, Herston, Queensland, Australia
| | - Catherine Mitchell
- Department of Pathology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Scott G Williams
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Division of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Declan G Murphy
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Annette Haworth
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound with dispersion analysis for the localization of prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. World J Urol 2020; 38:2811-2818. [PMID: 32078707 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03103-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2019] [Accepted: 01/21/2020] [Indexed: 10/25/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine the value of two-dimensional (2D) contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging and the additional value of contrast ultrasound dispersion imaging (CUDI) for the localization of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). METHODS In this multicentre study, subjects scheduled for a radical prostatectomy underwent 2D CEUS imaging preoperatively. CUDI maps were generated from the CEUS recordings. Both CEUS recordings and CUDI maps were scored on the likelihood of presenting csPCa (any Gleason ≥ 4 + 3 and Gleason 3 + 4 larger than 0.5 mL) by five observers and compared to radical prostatectomy histopathology. An automated three-dimensional (3D) fusion protocol was used to match imaging with histopathology. Receiver operator curve (ROC) analysis was performed per observer and imaging modality. RESULTS 133 of 216 (62%) patients were included in the final analysis. Average area under the ROC for all five readers for CEUS, CUDI and the combination was 0.78, 0.79 and 0.78, respectively. This yields a sensitivity and specificity of 81 and 64% for CEUS, 83 and 56% for CUDI and 83 and 55% for the combination. Interobserver agreement for CEUS, CUDI and the combination showed kappa values of 0.20, 0.18 and 0.18 respectively. CONCLUSION The sensitivity and specificity of 2D CEUS and CUDI for csPCa localization are moderate. Despite compressing CEUS in one image, CUDI showed a similar performance to 2D CEUS. With a sensitivity of 83% at cutoff point 3, it could become a useful imaging procedure, especially with 4D acquisition, improved quantification and combination with other US imaging techniques such as elastography.
Collapse
|
5
|
Wildeboer RR, Mannaerts CK, van Sloun RJG, Budäus L, Tilki D, Wijkstra H, Salomon G, Mischi M. Automated multiparametric localization of prostate cancer based on B-mode, shear-wave elastography, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound radiomics. Eur Radiol 2019; 30:806-815. [PMID: 31602512 PMCID: PMC6957554 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06436-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2019] [Accepted: 08/27/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the potential of machine learning based on B-mode, shear-wave elastography (SWE), and dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) radiomics for the localization of prostate cancer (PCa) lesions using transrectal ultrasound. METHODS This study was approved by the institutional review board and comprised 50 men with biopsy-confirmed PCa that were referred for radical prostatectomy. Prior to surgery, patients received transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), SWE, and DCE-US for three imaging planes. The images were automatically segmented and registered. First, model-based features related to contrast perfusion and dispersion were extracted from the DCE-US videos. Subsequently, radiomics were retrieved from all modalities. Machine learning was applied through a random forest classification algorithm, using the co-registered histopathology from the radical prostatectomy specimens as a reference to draw benign and malignant regions of interest. To avoid overfitting, the performance of the multiparametric classifier was assessed through leave-one-patient-out cross-validation. RESULTS The multiparametric classifier reached a region-wise area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.75 and 0.90 for PCa and Gleason > 3 + 4 significant PCa, respectively, thereby outperforming the best-performing single parameter (i.e., contrast velocity) yielding ROC-AUCs of 0.69 and 0.76, respectively. Machine learning revealed that combinations between perfusion-, dispersion-, and elasticity-related features were favored. CONCLUSIONS In this paper, technical feasibility of multiparametric machine learning to improve upon single US modalities for the localization of PCa has been demonstrated. Extended datasets for training and testing may establish the clinical value of automatic multiparametric US classification in the early diagnosis of PCa. KEY POINTS • Combination of B-mode ultrasound, shear-wave elastography, and contrast ultrasound radiomics through machine learning is technically feasible. • Multiparametric ultrasound demonstrated a higher prostate cancer localization ability than single ultrasound modalities. • Computer-aided multiparametric ultrasound could help clinicians in biopsy targeting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rogier R Wildeboer
- Lab of Biomedical Diagnostics, Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, De Rondom 70, 5612 AP, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | - Christophe K Mannaerts
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ruud J G van Sloun
- Lab of Biomedical Diagnostics, Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, De Rondom 70, 5612 AP, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Lars Budäus
- Martini-Clinic - Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Clinic - Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.,Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20251, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Hessel Wijkstra
- Lab of Biomedical Diagnostics, Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, De Rondom 70, 5612 AP, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.,Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Georg Salomon
- Martini-Clinic - Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Massimo Mischi
- Lab of Biomedical Diagnostics, Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, De Rondom 70, 5612 AP, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wildeboer RR, Van Sloun RJG, Schalk SG, Mannaerts CK, Van Der Linden JC, Huang P, Wijkstra H, Mischi M. Convective-Dispersion Modeling in 3D Contrast-Ultrasound Imaging for the Localization of Prostate Cancer. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING 2018; 37:2593-2602. [PMID: 29993539 DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2018.2843396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Despite being the solid tumor with the highest incidence in western men, prostate cancer (PCa) still lacks reliable imaging solutions that can overcome the need for systematic biopsies. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging (DCE-US) allows us to quantitatively characterize the vascular bed in the prostate, due to its ability to visualize an intravenously administered bolus of contrast agents. Previous research has demonstrated that DCE-US parameters related to the vascular architecture are useful markers for the localization of PCa lesions. In this paper, we propose a novel method to assess the convective dispersion (D) and velocity (v) of the contrast bolus spreading through the prostate from three-dimensional (3D) DCE-US recordings. By assuming that D and v are locally constant, we solve the convective-dispersion equation by minimizing the corresponding regularized least-squares problem. 3D multiparametric maps of D and v were compared with 3D histopathology retrieved from the radical prostatectomy specimens of six patients. With a pixel-wise area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.72 and 0.80, respectively, the method shows diagnostic value for the localization of PCa.
Collapse
|
7
|
Multiparametric ultrasound: evaluation of greyscale, shear wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for prostate cancer detection and localization in correlation to radical prostatectomy specimens. BMC Urol 2018; 18:98. [PMID: 30409150 PMCID: PMC6225621 DOI: 10.1186/s12894-018-0409-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2018] [Accepted: 10/17/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer (PCa) is advancing towards an imaging-driven approach. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, although increasingly used, has not shown sufficient accuracy to replace biopsy for now. The introduction of new ultrasound (US) modalities, such as quantitative contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE), shows promise but is not evidenced by sufficient high quality studies, especially for the combination of different US modalities. The primary objective of this study is to determine the individual and complementary diagnostic performance of greyscale US (GS), SWE, CEUS and their combination, multiparametric ultrasound (mpUS), for the detection and localization of PCa by comparison with corresponding histopathology. METHODS/DESIGN In this prospective clinical trial, US imaging consisting of GS, SWE and CEUS with quantitative mapping on 3 prostate imaging planes (base, mid and apex) will be performed in 50 patients with biopsy-proven PCa before planned radical prostatectomy using a clinical ultrasound scanner. All US imaging will be evaluated by US readers, scoring the four quadrants of each imaging plane for the likelihood of significant PCa based on a 1 to 5 Likert Scale. Following resection, PCa tumour foci will be identified, graded and attributed to the imaging-derived quadrants in each prostate plane for all prostatectomy specimens. Primary outcome measure will be the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of each US modality and mpUS to detect and localize significant PCa evaluated for different Likert Scale thresholds using receiver operating characteristics curve analyses. DISCUSSION In the evaluation of new PCa imaging modalities, a structured comparison with gold standard radical prostatectomy specimens is essential as first step. This trial is the first to combine the most promising ultrasound modalities into mpUS. It complies with the IDEAL stage 2b recommendations and will be an important step towards the evaluation of mpUS as a possible option for accurate detection and localization of PCa. TRIAL REGISTRATION The study protocol for multiparametric ultrasound was prospectively registered on Clinicaltrials.gov on 14 March 2017 with the registry name 'Multiparametric Ultrasound-Study for the Detection of Prostate Cancer' and trial registration number NCT03091231.
Collapse
|
8
|
Accurate validation of ultrasound imaging of prostate cancer: a review of challenges in registration of imaging and histopathology. J Ultrasound 2018; 21:197-207. [PMID: 30062440 PMCID: PMC6113189 DOI: 10.1007/s40477-018-0311-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2018] [Accepted: 07/11/2018] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
As the development of modalities for prostate cancer (PCa) imaging advances, the challenge of accurate registration between images and histopathologic ground truth becomes more pressing. Localization of PCa, rather than detection, requires a pixel-to-pixel validation of imaging based on histopathology after radical prostatectomy. Such a registration procedure is challenging for ultrasound modalities; not only the deformations of the prostate after resection have to be taken into account, but also the deformation due to the employed transrectal probe and the mismatch in orientation between imaging planes and pathology slices. In this work, we review the latest techniques to facilitate accurate validation of PCa localization in ultrasound imaging studies and extrapolate a general strategy for implementation of a registration procedure.
Collapse
|