Search

Contains fulltext : 305532.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Radboud University, 22 mei 2024, Promotores : Huisman, H.J., Goor, H. van Co-promotor : Broek, R.P.G ten, 179 p.

Contains fulltext : 305367.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), The adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in medicine poses challenges to existing clinical workflows. This commentary discusses the necessity of context-specific quality assurance (QA), emphasizing the need for robust QA measures with quality control (QC) procedures that encompass (1) acceptance testing (AT) before clinical use, (2) continuous QC monitoring, and (3) adequate user training. The discussion also covers essential components of AT and QA, illustrated with real-world examples. We also highlight what we see as the shared responsibility of manufacturers or vendors, regulators, healthcare systems, medical physicists, and clinicians to enact appropriate testing and oversight to ensure a safe and equitable transformation of medicine through AI.

01 februari 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, and specifically in deep learning (DL) techniques, have enabled broad application of these methods in health care. The promise of the DL approach has spurred further interest in computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) development and applications using both "traditional" machine learning methods and newer DL-based methods. We use the term CAD-AI to refer to this expanded clinical decision support environment that uses traditional and DL-based AI methods. Numerous studies have been published to date on the development of machine learning tools for computer-aided, or AI-assisted, clinical tasks. However, most of these machine learning models are not ready for clinical deployment. It is of paramount importance to ensure that a clinical decision support tool undergoes proper training and rigorous validation of its generalizability and robustness before adoption for patient care in the clinic. To address these important issues, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Computer-Aided Image Analysis Subcommittee (CADSC) is charged, in part, to develop recommendations on practices and standards for the development and performance assessment of computer-aided decision support systems. The committee has previously published two opinion papers on the evaluation of CAD systems and issues associated with user training and quality assurance of these systems in the clinic. With machine learning techniques continuing to evolve and CAD applications expanding to new stages of the patient care process, the current task group report considers the broader issues common to the development of most, if not all, CAD-AI applications and their translation from the bench to the clinic. The goal is to bring attention to the proper training and validation of machine learning algorithms that may improve their generalizability and reliability and accelerate the adoption of CAD-AI systems for clinical decision support.

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 287809.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of automatic longitudinal analysis of consecutive biparametric MRI (bpMRI) scans to detect clinically significant (cs) prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: This retrospective study included a multi-center dataset of 1513 patients who underwent bpMRI (T2 + DWI) between 2014 and 2020, of whom 73 patients underwent at least two consecutive bpMRI scans and repeat biopsies. A deep learning PCa detection model was developed to produce a heatmap of all PIRADS >/= 2 lesions across prior and current studies. The heatmaps for each patient's prior and current examination were used to extract differential volumetric and likelihood features reflecting explainable changes between examinations. A machine learning classifier was trained to predict from these features csPCa (ISUP > 1) at the current examination according to biopsy. A classifier trained on the current study only was developed for comparison. An extended classifier was developed to incorporate clinical parameters (PSA, PSA density, and age). The cross-validated diagnostic accuracies were compared using ROC analysis. The diagnostic performance of the best model was compared to the radiologist scores. RESULTS: The model including prior and current study (AUC 0.81, CI: 0.69, 0.91) resulted in a higher (p = 0.04) diagnostic accuracy than the current only model (AUC 0.73, CI: 0.61, 0.84). Adding clinical variables further improved diagnostic performance (AUC 0.86, CI: 0.77, 0.93). The diagnostic performance of the surveillance AI model was significantly better (p = 0.02) than of radiologists (AUC 0.69, CI: 0.54, 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed AI-assisted surveillance of prostate MRI can pick up explainable, diagnostically relevant changes with promising diagnostic accuracy. KEY POINTS: * Sequential prostate MRI scans can be automatically evaluated using a hybrid deep learning and machine learning approach. * The diagnostic accuracy of our csPCa detection AI model improved by including c

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of a deep learning-based computer-aided diagnosis (DL-CAD) system on experienced and less-experienced radiologists in reading prostate mpMRI. METHODS: In this retrospective, multi-reader multi-case study, a consecutive set of 184 patients examined between 01/2018 and 08/2019 were enrolled. Ground truth was combined targeted and 12-core systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Four radiologists, two experienced and two less-experienced, evaluated each case twice, once without (DL-CAD-) and once assisted by DL-CAD (DL-CAD+). ROC analysis, sensitivities, specificities, PPV and NPV were calculated to compare the diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) between the two groups (DL-CAD- vs. DL-CAD+). Spearman's correlation coefficients were evaluated to assess the relationship between PI-RADS category and Gleason score (GS). Also, the median reading times were compared for the two reading groups. RESULTS: In total, 172 patients were included in the final analysis. With DL-CAD assistance, the overall AUC of the less-experienced radiologists increased significantly from 0.66 to 0.80 (p = 0.001; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 1) and from 0.68 to 0.80 (p = 0.002; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 2). Experienced radiologists showed an AUC increase from 0.81 to 0.86 (p = 0.146; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 1) and from 0.81 to 0.84 (p = 0.433; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 2). Furthermore, the correlation between PI-RADS category and GS improved significantly in the DL-CAD + group (0.45 vs. 0.57; p = 0.03), while the median reading time was reduced from 157 to 150 s (p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: DL-CAD assistance increased the mean detection performance, with the most significant benefit for the less-experienced radiologist; with the help of DL-CAD less-experienced radiologists reached performances comparable to that of experienced radiologists. KEY POINTS: * DL-CAD used as a concurrent reading aid helps radiologists to distinguish between benign and cancerous lesio

Item does not contain fulltext, Abdominal adhesions present a diagnostic challenge, and classic imaging modalities can miss their presence. Cine-MRI, which records visceral sliding during patient-controlled breathing, has proven useful in detecting and mapping adhesions. However, patient movements can affect the accuracy of these images, despite there being no standardized algorithm for defining sufficiently high-quality images. This study aims to develop a biomarker for patient movements and determine which patient-related factors influence movement during cine-MRI. Included patients underwent cine-MRI to detect adhesions for chronic abdominal complaints, data were collected from electronic patient files and radiologic reports. Ninety slices of cine-MRI were assessed for quality, using a five-point scale to quantify amplitude, frequency, and slope, from which an image-processing algorithm was developed. The biomarkers closely correlated with qualitative assessments, with an amplitude of 6.5 mm used to distinguish between sufficient and insufficient-quality slices. In multivariable analysis, the amplitude of movement was influenced by age, sex, length, and the presence of a stoma. Unfortunately, no factor was changeable. Strategies for mitigating their impact may be challenging. This study highlights the utility of the developed biomarker in evaluating image quality and providing useful feedback for clinicians. Future studies could improve diagnostic quality by implementing automated quality criteria during cine-MRI.

Contains fulltext : 287809.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of automatic longitudinal analysis of consecutive biparametric MRI (bpMRI) scans to detect clinically significant (cs) prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: This retrospective study included a multi-center dataset of 1513 patients who underwent bpMRI (T2 + DWI) between 2014 and 2020, of whom 73 patients underwent at least two consecutive bpMRI scans and repeat biopsies. A deep learning PCa detection model was developed to produce a heatmap of all PIRADS >/= 2 lesions across prior and current studies. The heatmaps for each patient's prior and current examination were used to extract differential volumetric and likelihood features reflecting explainable changes between examinations. A machine learning classifier was trained to predict from these features csPCa (ISUP > 1) at the current examination according to biopsy. A classifier trained on the current study only was developed for comparison. An extended classifier was developed to incorporate clinical parameters (PSA, PSA density, and age). The cross-validated diagnostic accuracies were compared using ROC analysis. The diagnostic performance of the best model was compared to the radiologist scores. RESULTS: The model including prior and current study (AUC 0.81, CI: 0.69, 0.91) resulted in a higher (p = 0.04) diagnostic accuracy than the current only model (AUC 0.73, CI: 0.61, 0.84). Adding clinical variables further improved diagnostic performance (AUC 0.86, CI: 0.77, 0.93). The diagnostic performance of the surveillance AI model was significantly better (p = 0.02) than of radiologists (AUC 0.69, CI: 0.54, 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed AI-assisted surveillance of prostate MRI can pick up explainable, diagnostically relevant changes with promising diagnostic accuracy. KEY POINTS: * Sequential prostate MRI scans can be automatically evaluated using a hybrid deep learning and machine learning approach. * The diagnostic accuracy of our csPCa detection AI model improved by including c

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of a deep learning-based computer-aided diagnosis (DL-CAD) system on experienced and less-experienced radiologists in reading prostate mpMRI. METHODS: In this retrospective, multi-reader multi-case study, a consecutive set of 184 patients examined between 01/2018 and 08/2019 were enrolled. Ground truth was combined targeted and 12-core systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Four radiologists, two experienced and two less-experienced, evaluated each case twice, once without (DL-CAD-) and once assisted by DL-CAD (DL-CAD+). ROC analysis, sensitivities, specificities, PPV and NPV were calculated to compare the diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) between the two groups (DL-CAD- vs. DL-CAD+). Spearman's correlation coefficients were evaluated to assess the relationship between PI-RADS category and Gleason score (GS). Also, the median reading times were compared for the two reading groups. RESULTS: In total, 172 patients were included in the final analysis. With DL-CAD assistance, the overall AUC of the less-experienced radiologists increased significantly from 0.66 to 0.80 (p = 0.001; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 1) and from 0.68 to 0.80 (p = 0.002; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 2). Experienced radiologists showed an AUC increase from 0.81 to 0.86 (p = 0.146; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 1) and from 0.81 to 0.84 (p = 0.433; cutoff ISUP GG >/= 2). Furthermore, the correlation between PI-RADS category and GS improved significantly in the DL-CAD + group (0.45 vs. 0.57; p = 0.03), while the median reading time was reduced from 157 to 150 s (p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: DL-CAD assistance increased the mean detection performance, with the most significant benefit for the less-experienced radiologist; with the help of DL-CAD less-experienced radiologists reached performances comparable to that of experienced radiologists. KEY POINTS: * DL-CAD used as a concurrent reading aid helps radiologists to distinguish between benign and cancerous lesio

Item does not contain fulltext

01 februari 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, and specifically in deep learning (DL) techniques, have enabled broad application of these methods in health care. The promise of the DL approach has spurred further interest in computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) development and applications using both "traditional" machine learning methods and newer DL-based methods. We use the term CAD-AI to refer to this expanded clinical decision support environment that uses traditional and DL-based AI methods. Numerous studies have been published to date on the development of machine learning tools for computer-aided, or AI-assisted, clinical tasks. However, most of these machine learning models are not ready for clinical deployment. It is of paramount importance to ensure that a clinical decision support tool undergoes proper training and rigorous validation of its generalizability and robustness before adoption for patient care in the clinic. To address these important issues, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Computer-Aided Image Analysis Subcommittee (CADSC) is charged, in part, to develop recommendations on practices and standards for the development and performance assessment of computer-aided decision support systems. The committee has previously published two opinion papers on the evaluation of CAD systems and issues associated with user training and quality assurance of these systems in the clinic. With machine learning techniques continuing to evolve and CAD applications expanding to new stages of the patient care process, the current task group report considers the broader issues common to the development of most, if not all, CAD-AI applications and their translation from the bench to the clinic. The goal is to bring attention to the proper training and validation of machine learning algorithms that may improve their generalizability and reliability and accelerate the adoption of CAD-AI systems for clinical decision support.

Item does not contain fulltext, Cine-MRI for adhesion detection is a promising novel modality that can help the large group of patients developing pain after abdominal surgery. Few studies into its diagnostic accuracy are available, and none address observer variability. This retrospective study explores the inter- and intra-observer variability, diagnostic accuracy, and the effect of experience. A total of 15 observers with a variety of experience reviewed 61 sagittal cine-MRI slices, placing box annotations with a confidence score at locations suspect for adhesions. Five observers reviewed the slices again one year later. Inter- and intra-observer variability are quantified using Fleiss’ (inter) and Cohen’s (intra) κ and percentage agreement. Diagnostic accuracy is quantified with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis based on a consensus standard. Inter-observer Fleiss’ κ values range from 0.04 to 0.34, showing poor to fair agreement. High general and cine-MRI experience led to significantly (p < 0.001) better agreement among observers. The intra-observer results show Cohen’s κ values between 0.37 and 0.53 for all observers, except one with a low κ of −0.11. Group AUC scores lie between 0.66 and 0.72, with individual observers reaching 0.78. This study confirms that cine-MRI can diagnose adhesions, with respect to a radiologist consensus panel and shows that experience improves reading cine-MRI. Observers without specific experience adapt to this modality quickly after a short online tutorial. Observer agreement is fair at best and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) scores leave room for improvement. Consistently interpreting this novel modality needs further research, for instance, by developing reporting guidelines or artificial intelligence-based methods.

01 april 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: Genome-wide association studies have revealed over 200 genetic susceptibility loci for prostate cancer (PCa). By combining them, polygenic risk scores (PRS) can be generated to predict risk of PCa. We summarize the published evidence and conduct meta-analyses of PRS as a predictor of PCa risk in Caucasian men. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from 59 studies, with 16 studies including 17 separate analyses used in the main meta-analysis with a total of 20,786 cases and 69,106 controls identified through a systematic search of ten databases. Random effects meta-analysis was used to obtain pooled estimates of area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC). Meta-regression was used to assess the impact of number of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) incorporated in PRS on AUC. Heterogeneity is expressed as I(2) scores. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger tests. RESULTS: The ability of PRS to identify men with PCa was modest (pooled AUC 0.63, 95% CI 0.62-0.64) with moderate consistency (I(2) 64%). Combining PRS with clinical variables increased the pooled AUC to 0.74 (0.68-0.81). Meta-regression showed only negligible increase in AUC for adding incremental SNPs. Despite moderate heterogeneity, publication bias was not evident. CONCLUSION: Typically, PRS accuracy is comparable to PSA or family history with a pooled AUC value 0.63 indicating mediocre performance for PRS alone.

01 augustus 2023, Item does not contain fulltext

01 september 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, Background A priori identification of patients at risk of artificial intelligence (AI) failure in diagnosing cancer would contribute to the safer clinical integration of diagnostic algorithms. Purpose To evaluate AI prediction variability as an uncertainty quantification (UQ) metric for identifying cases at risk of AI failure in diagnosing cancer at MRI and CT across different cancer types, data sets, and algorithms. Materials and Methods Multicenter data sets and publicly available AI algorithms from three previous studies that evaluated detection of pancreatic cancer on contrast-enhanced CT images, detection of prostate cancer on MRI scans, and prediction of pulmonary nodule malignancy on low-dose CT images were analyzed retrospectively. Each task's algorithm was extended to generate an uncertainty score based on ensemble prediction variability. AI accuracy percentage and partial area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (pAUC) were compared between certain and uncertain patient groups in a range of percentile thresholds (10%-90%) for the uncertainty score using permutation tests for statistical significance. The pulmonary nodule malignancy prediction algorithm was compared with 11 clinical readers for the certain group (CG) and uncertain group (UG). Results In total, 18 022 images were used for training and 838 images were used for testing. AI diagnostic accuracy was higher for the cases in the CG across all tasks (P < .001). At an 80% threshold of certain predictions, accuracy in the CG was 21%-29% higher than in the UG and 4%-6% higher than in the overall test data sets. The lesion-level pAUC in the CG was 0.25-0.39 higher than in the UG and 0.05-0.08 higher than in the overall test data sets (P < .001). For pulmonary nodule malignancy prediction, accuracy of AI was on par with clinicians for cases in the CG (AI results vs clinician results, 80% [95% CI: 76, 85] vs 78% [95% CI: 70, 87]; P = .07) but worse for cases in the UG (AI results vs clinicia

Item does not contain fulltext

01 september 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, PURPOSE: To evaluate a novel method of semisupervised learning (SSL) guided by automated sparse information from diagnostic reports to leverage additional data for deep learning-based malignancy detection in patients with clinically significant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 7756 prostate MRI examinations (6380 patients) performed between January 2014 and December 2020 for model development. An SSL method, report-guided SSL (RG-SSL), was developed for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using biparametric MRI. RG-SSL, supervised learning (SL), and state-of-the-art SSL methods were trained using 100, 300, 1000, or 3050 manually annotated examinations. Performance on detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by RG-SSL, SL, and SSL was compared on 300 unseen examinations from an external center with a histopathologically confirmed reference standard. Performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and free-response ROC analysis. P values for performance differences were generated with a permutation test. RESULTS: At 100 manually annotated examinations, mean examination-based diagnostic area under the ROC curve (AUC) values for RG-SSL, SL, and the best SSL were 0.86 ± 0.01 (SD), 0.78 ± 0.03, and 0.81 ± 0.02, respectively. Lesion-based detection partial AUCs were 0.62 ± 0.02, 0.44 ± 0.04, and 0.48 ± 0.09, respectively. Examination-based performance of SL with 3050 examinations was matched by RG-SSL with 169 manually annotated examinations, thus requiring 14 times fewer annotations. Lesion-based performance was matched with 431 manually annotated examinations, requiring six times fewer annotations. CONCLUSION: RG-SSL outperformed SSL in clinically significant prostate cancer detection and achieved performance similar to SL even at very low annotation budgets.Keywords: Annotation Efficiency, Computer-aided Detection and Diagnosis, MRI, Prostate Cancer, Semisupervised Deep Learning

Contains fulltext : 297073.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Artificial intelligence has opened a new path of innovation in magnetic resonance (MR) image reconstruction of undersampled k-space acquisitions. This review offers readers an analysis of the current deep learning-based MR image reconstruction methods. The literature in this field shows exponential growth, both in volume and complexity, as the capabilities of machine learning in solving inverse problems such as image reconstruction are explored. We review the latest developments, aiming to assist researchers and radiologists who are developing new methods or seeking to provide valuable feedback. We shed light on key concepts by exploring the technical intricacies of MR image reconstruction, highlighting the importance of raw datasets and the difficulty of evaluating diagnostic value using standard metrics.Relevance statement Increasingly complex algorithms output reconstructed images that are difficult to assess for robustness and diagnostic quality, necessitating high-quality datasets and collaboration with radiologists.Key points• Deep learning-based image reconstruction algorithms are increasing both in complexity and performance.• The evaluation of reconstructed images may mistake perceived image quality for diagnostic value.• Collaboration with radiologists is crucial for advancing deep learning technology.

Contains fulltext : 247178.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 247178.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric MRI with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment is sensitive but not specific for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. This study validates the diagnostic accuracy of the recently suggested fractal dimension (FD) of perfusion for detecting clinically significant cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Routine clinical MR imaging data, acquired at 3 T without an endorectal coil including dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences, of 72 prostate cancer foci in 64 patients were analyzed. In-bore MRI-guided biopsy with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading served as reference standard. Previously established FD cutoffs for predicting tumor grade were compared to measurements of the apparent diffusion coefficient (25th percentile, ADC25) and PI-RADS assessment with and without inclusion of the FD as separate criterion. RESULTS: Fractal analysis allowed prediction of ISUP grade groups 1 to 4 but not 5, with high agreement to the reference standard (kappaFD = 0.88 [CI: 0.79-0.98]). Integrating fractal analysis into PI-RADS allowed a strong improvement in specificity and overall accuracy while maintaining high sensitivity for significant cancer detection (ISUP > 1; PI-RADS alone: sensitivity = 96%, specificity = 20%, area under the receiver operating curve [AUC] = 0.65; versus PI-RADS with fractal analysis: sensitivity = 95%, specificity = 88%, AUC = 0.92, p < 0.001). ADC25 only differentiated low-grade group 1 from pooled higher-grade groups 2-5 (kappaADC = 0.36 [CI: 0.12-0.59]). Importantly, fractal analysis was significantly more reliable than ADC25 in predicting non-significant and clinically significant cancer (AUCFD = 0.96 versus AUCADC = 0.75, p < 0.001). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly affected by zone location. CONCLUSIONS: Fractal analysis is accurate in noninvasively predicting tumor grades in prostate cancer and adds independent information when implemented into PI-RADS assessmen

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: To assess Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)-trained deep learning (DL) algorithm performance and to investigate the effect of data size and prior knowledge on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naive men with a suspicion of PCa. METHODS: Multi-institution data included 2734 consecutive biopsy-naive men with elevated PSA levels (>/= 3 ng/mL) that underwent multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI). mpMRI exams were prospectively reported using PI-RADS v2 by expert radiologists. A DL framework was designed and trained on center 1 data (n = 1952) to predict PI-RADS >/= 4 (n = 1092) lesions from bi-parametric MRI (bpMRI). Experiments included varying the number of cases and the use of automatic zonal segmentation as a DL prior. Independent center 2 cases (n = 296) that included pathology outcome (systematic and MRI targeted biopsy) were used to compute performance for radiologists and DL. The performance of detecting PI-RADS 4-5 and Gleason > 6 lesions was assessed on 782 unseen cases (486 center 1, 296 center 2) using free-response ROC (FROC) and ROC analysis. RESULTS: The DL sensitivity for detecting PI-RADS >/= 4 lesions was 87% (193/223, 95% CI: 82-91) at an average of 1 false positive (FP) per patient, and an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.84-0.91). The DL sensitivity for the detection of Gleason > 6 lesions was 85% (79/93, 95% CI: 77-83) @ 1 FP compared to 91% (85/93, 95% CI: 84-96) @ 0.3 FP for a consensus panel of expert radiologists. Data size and prior zonal knowledge significantly affected performance (4%, [Formula: see text]). CONCLUSION: PI-RADS-trained DL can accurately detect and localize Gleason > 6 lesions. DL could reach expert performance using substantially more than 2000 training cases, and DL zonal segmentation. KEY POINTS: * AI for prostate MRI analysis depends strongly on data size and prior zonal knowledge. * AI needs substantially more than 2000 training cases to achieve expert performance.

Contains fulltext : 247178.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 283325.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), estimated to become the second leading cause of cancer deaths in western societies by 2030, was flagged as a neglected cancer by the European Commission and the United States Congress. Due to lack of investment in research and development, combined with a complex and aggressive tumour biology, PDAC overall survival has not significantly improved the past decades. Cross-sectional imaging and histopathology play a crucial role throughout the patient pathway. However, current clinical guidelines for diagnostic workup, patient stratification, treatment response assessment, and follow-up are non-uniform and lack evidence-based consensus. Artificial Intelligence (AI) can leverage multimodal data to improve patient outcomes, but PDAC AI research is too scattered and lacking in quality to be incorporated into clinical workflows. This review describes the patient pathway and derives touchpoints for image-based AI research in collaboration with a multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional expert panel. The literature exploring AI to address these touchpoints is thoroughly retrieved and analysed to identify the existing trends and knowledge gaps. The results show absence of multi-institutional, well-curated datasets, an essential building block for robust AI applications. Furthermore, most research is unimodal, does not use state-of-the-art AI techniques, and lacks reliable ground truth. Based on this, the future research agenda for clinically relevant, image-driven AI in PDAC is proposed.

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: Harmonisation of outcome reporting and definitions for clinical trials and routine patient records can enable health care systems to provide more efficient outcome-driven and patient-centred interventions. We report on the work of the PIONEER Consortium in this context for prostate cancer (PCa). OBJECTIVE: To update and integrate existing core outcome sets (COS) for PCa for the different stages of the disease, assess their applicability, and develop standardised definitions of prioritised outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We followed a four-stage process involving: (1) systematic reviews; (2) qualitative interviews; (3) expert group meetings to agree standardised terminologies; and (4) recommendations for the most appropriate definitions of clinician-reported outcomes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Following four systematic reviews, a multinational interview study, and expert group consensus meetings, we defined the most clinically suitable definitions for (1) COS for localised and locally advanced PCa and (2) COS for metastatic and nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa. No new outcomes were identified in our COS for localised and locally advanced PCa. For our COS for metastatic and nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa, nine new core outcomes were identified. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first COS for PCa for which the definitions of prioritised outcomes have been surveyed in a systematic, transparent, and replicable way. This is also the first time that outcome definitions across all prostate cancer COS have been agreed on by a multidisciplinary expert group and recommended for use in research and clinical practice. To limit heterogeneity across research, these COS should be recommended for future effectiveness trials, systematic reviews, guidelines and clinical practice of localised and metastatic PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patient outcomes after treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) are difficult to compare because of variability. To allow better use of data from patients

Contains fulltext : 249481.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric MRI with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment is sensitive but not specific for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. This study validates the diagnostic accuracy of the recently suggested fractal dimension (FD) of perfusion for detecting clinically significant cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Routine clinical MR imaging data, acquired at 3 T without an endorectal coil including dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences, of 72 prostate cancer foci in 64 patients were analyzed. In-bore MRI-guided biopsy with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading served as reference standard. Previously established FD cutoffs for predicting tumor grade were compared to measurements of the apparent diffusion coefficient (25th percentile, ADC25) and PI-RADS assessment with and without inclusion of the FD as separate criterion. RESULTS: Fractal analysis allowed prediction of ISUP grade groups 1 to 4 but not 5, with high agreement to the reference standard (kappaFD = 0.88 [CI: 0.79-0.98]). Integrating fractal analysis into PI-RADS allowed a strong improvement in specificity and overall accuracy while maintaining high sensitivity for significant cancer detection (ISUP > 1; PI-RADS alone: sensitivity = 96%, specificity = 20%, area under the receiver operating curve [AUC] = 0.65; versus PI-RADS with fractal analysis: sensitivity = 95%, specificity = 88%, AUC = 0.92, p < 0.001). ADC25 only differentiated low-grade group 1 from pooled higher-grade groups 2-5 (kappaADC = 0.36 [CI: 0.12-0.59]). Importantly, fractal analysis was significantly more reliable than ADC25 in predicting non-significant and clinically significant cancer (AUCFD = 0.96 versus AUCADC = 0.75, p < 0.001). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly affected by zone location. CONCLUSIONS: Fractal analysis is accurate in noninvasively predicting tumor grades in prostate cancer and adds independent information when implemented into PI-RADS assessmen

Contains fulltext : 283321.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death with a 5-year survival rate of 10%. Quantitative CT perfusion (CTP) can provide additional diagnostic information compared to the limited accuracy of the current standard, contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). This systematic review evaluates CTP for diagnosis, grading, and treatment assessment of PDAC. The secondary goal is to provide an overview of scan protocols and perfusion models used for CTP in PDAC. The search strategy combined synonyms for 'CTP' and 'PDAC.' Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched from January 2000 to December 2020 for studies using CTP to evaluate PDAC. The risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. 607 abstracts were screened, of which 29 were selected for full-text eligibility. 21 studies were included in the final analysis with a total of 760 patients. All studies comparing PDAC with non-tumorous parenchyma found significant CTP-based differences in blood flow (BF) and blood volume (BV). Two studies found significant differences between pathological grades. Two other studies showed that BF could predict neoadjuvant treatment response. A wide variety in kinetic models and acquisition protocol was found among included studies. Quantitative CTP shows a potential benefit in PDAC diagnosis and can serve as a tool for pathological grading and treatment assessment; however, clinical evidence is still limited. To improve clinical use, standardized acquisition and reconstruction parameters are necessary for interchangeability of the perfusion parameters.

Contains fulltext : 253375.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 252017.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric MRI has high diagnostic accuracy for detecting prostate cancer, but non-invasive prediction of tumor grade remains challenging. Characterizing tumor perfusion by exploiting the fractal nature of vascular anatomy might elucidate the aggressive potential of a tumor. This study introduces the concept of fractal analysis for characterizing prostate cancer perfusion and reports about its usefulness for non-invasive prediction of tumor grade. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the openly available PROSTATEx dataset with 112 cancer foci in 99 patients. In all patients, histological grading groups specified by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) were obtained from in-bore MRI-guided biopsy. Fractal analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI sequences was performed, yielding fractal dimension (FD) as quantitative descriptor. Two-class and multiclass diagnostic accuracy was analyzed using area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristic analysis, and optimal FD cutoffs were established. Additionally, we compared fractal analysis to conventional apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements. RESULTS: Fractal analysis of perfusion allowed accurate differentiation of non-significant (group 1) and clinically significant (groups 2-5) cancer with a sensitivity of 91% (confidence interval [CI]: 83-96%) and a specificity of 86% (CI: 73-94%). FD correlated linearly with ISUP groups (r(2) = 0.874, p < 0.001). Significant groupwise differences were obtained between low, intermediate, and high ISUP group 1-4 (p

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer among men worldwide. Urinary, bowel, and sexual function, as well as hormonal symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), were prioritised by patients and professionals as part of a core outcome set for localised PCa regardless of treatment type. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in localised PCa and recommend PROMs for use in routine practice and research settings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The psychometric properties of PROMs measuring functional and HRQoL domains used in randomised controlled trials including patients with localised PCa were assessed according to the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology. MEDLINE and Embase were searched to identify publications evaluating psychometric properties of the PROMs. The characteristics and methodological quality of the studies included were extracted, tabulated, and assessed according to the COSMIN criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 27 studies evaluating psychometric properties of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life core 30 (QLQ-C30) and prostate cancer 25 (QLQ-PR25) modules, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and the 36-item (SF-36) and 12-item Short-Form health survey (SF-12) PROMs were identified and included in the systematic review. EPIC and EORTC QLQ-C30, a general module that assesses patients' physical, psychological, and social functions, were characterised by high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.46-0.96 and 0.68-0.94 respectively) but low content validity. EORTC QLQ-PR25, which is primarily designed to assess PCa-specific HRQoL, had moderate content validity and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.39-0.87

Contains fulltext : 283301.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: To determine the value of a deep learning masked (DLM) auto-fixed volume of interest (VOI) segmentation method as an alternative to manual segmentation for radiomics-based diagnosis of clinically significant (CS) prostate cancer (PCa) on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included a retrospective multi-center dataset of 524 PCa lesions (of which 204 are CS PCa) on bpMRI. All lesions were both semi-automatically segmented with a DLM auto-fixed VOI method (averaging < 10 s per lesion) and manually segmented by an expert uroradiologist (averaging 5 min per lesion). The DLM auto-fixed VOI method uses a spherical VOI (with its center at the location of the lowest apparent diffusion coefficient of the prostate lesion as indicated with a single mouse click) from which non-prostate voxels are removed using a deep learning-based prostate segmentation algorithm. Thirteen different DLM auto-fixed VOI diameters (ranging from 6 to 30 mm) were explored. Extracted radiomics data were split into training and test sets (4:1 ratio). Performance was assessed with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: In the test set, the area under the ROC curve (AUCs) of the DLM auto-fixed VOI method with a VOI diameter of 18 mm (0.76 [95% CI: 0.66-0.85]) was significantly higher (p = 0.0198) than that of the manual segmentation method (0.62 [95% CI: 0.52-0.73]). CONCLUSIONS: A DLM auto-fixed VOI segmentation can provide a potentially more accurate radiomics diagnosis of CS PCa than expert manual segmentation while also reducing expert time investment by more than 97%. KEY POINTS: * Compared to traditional expert-based segmentation, a deep learning mask (DLM) auto-fixed VOI placement is more accurate at detecting CS PCa. * Compared to traditional expert-based segmentation, a DLM auto-fixed VOI placement is faster and can result in a 97% time reduction. * Applying deep learning to an auto-fixed VOI radiomics approach can

Contains fulltext : 249485.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: To assess Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)-trained deep learning (DL) algorithm performance and to investigate the effect of data size and prior knowledge on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naive men with a suspicion of PCa. METHODS: Multi-institution data included 2734 consecutive biopsy-naive men with elevated PSA levels (>/= 3 ng/mL) that underwent multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI). mpMRI exams were prospectively reported using PI-RADS v2 by expert radiologists. A DL framework was designed and trained on center 1 data (n = 1952) to predict PI-RADS >/= 4 (n = 1092) lesions from bi-parametric MRI (bpMRI). Experiments included varying the number of cases and the use of automatic zonal segmentation as a DL prior. Independent center 2 cases (n = 296) that included pathology outcome (systematic and MRI targeted biopsy) were used to compute performance for radiologists and DL. The performance of detecting PI-RADS 4-5 and Gleason > 6 lesions was assessed on 782 unseen cases (486 center 1, 296 center 2) using free-response ROC (FROC) and ROC analysis. RESULTS: The DL sensitivity for detecting PI-RADS >/= 4 lesions was 87% (193/223, 95% CI: 82-91) at an average of 1 false positive (FP) per patient, and an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.84-0.91). The DL sensitivity for the detection of Gleason > 6 lesions was 85% (79/93, 95% CI: 77-83) @ 1 FP compared to 91% (85/93, 95% CI: 84-96) @ 0.3 FP for a consensus panel of expert radiologists. Data size and prior zonal knowledge significantly affected performance (4%, [Formula: see text]). CONCLUSION: PI-RADS-trained DL can accurately detect and localize Gleason > 6 lesions. DL could reach expert performance using substantially more than 2000 training cases, and DL zonal segmentation. KEY POINTS: * AI for prostate MRI analysis depends strongly on data size and prior zonal knowledge. * AI needs substantially more than 2000 training cases to achieve expert performance.

Item does not contain fulltext, Artificial intelligence (AI) for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is starting to play a clinical role for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. AI-assisted reading is feasible, allowing workflow reduction. A total of 3,369 multi-vendor prostate MRI cases are available in open datasets, acquired from 2003 to 2021 in Europe or USA at 3 T (n = 3,018; 89.6%) or 1.5 T (n = 296; 8.8%), 346 cases scanned with endorectal coil (10.3%), 3,023 (89.7%) with phased-array surface coils; 412 collected for anatomical segmentation tasks, 3,096 for PCa detection/classification; for 2,240 cases lesions delineation is available and 56 cases have matching histopathologic images; for 2,620 cases the PSA level is provided; the total size of all open datasets amounts to approximately 253 GB. Of note, quality of annotations provided per dataset highly differ and attention must be paid when using these datasets (e.g., data overlap). Seven grand challenges and commercial applications from eleven vendors are here considered. Few small studies provided prospective validation. More work is needed, in particular validation on large-scale multi-institutional, well-curated public datasets to test general applicability. Moreover, AI needs to be explored for clinical stages other than detection/characterization (e.g., follow-up, prognosis, interventions, and focal treatment).

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: As part of the PIONEER Consortium objectives, we have explored which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are available in relation to our previously defined clinician and patient-reported outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa). DESIGN: We performed a systematic review to identify validated and non-validated studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched on 21 January 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only quantitative studies were included. Single studies with fewer than 50 participants, published before 2014 and looking at outcomes which are not prioritised in the PIONEER core outcome set were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: After initial screening, we extracted data following the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of prognostic factor studies (CHARMS-PF) criteria and discussed the identified factors with a multidisciplinary expert group. The quality of the included papers was scored for applicability and risk of bias using validated tools such as PROBAST, Quality in Prognostic Studies and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. RESULTS: The search identified 6604 studies, from which 489 DPFs were included. Sixty-four of those were internally or externally validated. However, only three studies on diagnostic and seven studies on prognostic factors had a low risk of bias and a low risk concerning applicability. CONCLUSION: Most of the DPFs identified require additional evaluation and validation in properly designed studies before they can be recommended for use in clinical practice. The PIONEER online search tool for DPFs for PCa will enable researchers to understand the quality of the current research and help them design future studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There are no ethical implications.

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: Harmonisation of outcome reporting and definitions for clinical trials and routine patient records can enable health care systems to provide more efficient outcome-driven and patient-centred interventions. We report on the work of the PIONEER Consortium in this context for prostate cancer (PCa). OBJECTIVE: To update and integrate existing core outcome sets (COS) for PCa for the different stages of the disease, assess their applicability, and develop standardised definitions of prioritised outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We followed a four-stage process involving: (1) systematic reviews; (2) qualitative interviews; (3) expert group meetings to agree standardised terminologies; and (4) recommendations for the most appropriate definitions of clinician-reported outcomes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Following four systematic reviews, a multinational interview study, and expert group consensus meetings, we defined the most clinically suitable definitions for (1) COS for localised and locally advanced PCa and (2) COS for metastatic and nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa. No new outcomes were identified in our COS for localised and locally advanced PCa. For our COS for metastatic and nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa, nine new core outcomes were identified. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first COS for PCa for which the definitions of prioritised outcomes have been surveyed in a systematic, transparent, and replicable way. This is also the first time that outcome definitions across all prostate cancer COS have been agreed on by a multidisciplinary expert group and recommended for use in research and clinical practice. To limit heterogeneity across research, these COS should be recommended for future effectiveness trials, systematic reviews, guidelines and clinical practice of localised and metastatic PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patient outcomes after treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) are difficult to compare because of variability. To allow better use of data from patients

Contains fulltext : 249481.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric MRI with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment is sensitive but not specific for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. This study validates the diagnostic accuracy of the recently suggested fractal dimension (FD) of perfusion for detecting clinically significant cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Routine clinical MR imaging data, acquired at 3 T without an endorectal coil including dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences, of 72 prostate cancer foci in 64 patients were analyzed. In-bore MRI-guided biopsy with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading served as reference standard. Previously established FD cutoffs for predicting tumor grade were compared to measurements of the apparent diffusion coefficient (25th percentile, ADC25) and PI-RADS assessment with and without inclusion of the FD as separate criterion. RESULTS: Fractal analysis allowed prediction of ISUP grade groups 1 to 4 but not 5, with high agreement to the reference standard (kappaFD = 0.88 [CI: 0.79-0.98]). Integrating fractal analysis into PI-RADS allowed a strong improvement in specificity and overall accuracy while maintaining high sensitivity for significant cancer detection (ISUP > 1; PI-RADS alone: sensitivity = 96%, specificity = 20%, area under the receiver operating curve [AUC] = 0.65; versus PI-RADS with fractal analysis: sensitivity = 95%, specificity = 88%, AUC = 0.92, p < 0.001). ADC25 only differentiated low-grade group 1 from pooled higher-grade groups 2-5 (kappaADC = 0.36 [CI: 0.12-0.59]). Importantly, fractal analysis was significantly more reliable than ADC25 in predicting non-significant and clinically significant cancer (AUCFD = 0.96 versus AUCADC = 0.75, p < 0.001). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly affected by zone location. CONCLUSIONS: Fractal analysis is accurate in noninvasively predicting tumor grades in prostate cancer and adds independent information when implemented into PI-RADS assessmen

Contains fulltext : 283321.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death with a 5-year survival rate of 10%. Quantitative CT perfusion (CTP) can provide additional diagnostic information compared to the limited accuracy of the current standard, contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). This systematic review evaluates CTP for diagnosis, grading, and treatment assessment of PDAC. The secondary goal is to provide an overview of scan protocols and perfusion models used for CTP in PDAC. The search strategy combined synonyms for 'CTP' and 'PDAC.' Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched from January 2000 to December 2020 for studies using CTP to evaluate PDAC. The risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. 607 abstracts were screened, of which 29 were selected for full-text eligibility. 21 studies were included in the final analysis with a total of 760 patients. All studies comparing PDAC with non-tumorous parenchyma found significant CTP-based differences in blood flow (BF) and blood volume (BV). Two studies found significant differences between pathological grades. Two other studies showed that BF could predict neoadjuvant treatment response. A wide variety in kinetic models and acquisition protocol was found among included studies. Quantitative CTP shows a potential benefit in PDAC diagnosis and can serve as a tool for pathological grading and treatment assessment; however, clinical evidence is still limited. To improve clinical use, standardized acquisition and reconstruction parameters are necessary for interchangeability of the perfusion parameters.

Contains fulltext : 253375.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 252017.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric MRI has high diagnostic accuracy for detecting prostate cancer, but non-invasive prediction of tumor grade remains challenging. Characterizing tumor perfusion by exploiting the fractal nature of vascular anatomy might elucidate the aggressive potential of a tumor. This study introduces the concept of fractal analysis for characterizing prostate cancer perfusion and reports about its usefulness for non-invasive prediction of tumor grade. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the openly available PROSTATEx dataset with 112 cancer foci in 99 patients. In all patients, histological grading groups specified by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) were obtained from in-bore MRI-guided biopsy. Fractal analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI sequences was performed, yielding fractal dimension (FD) as quantitative descriptor. Two-class and multiclass diagnostic accuracy was analyzed using area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristic analysis, and optimal FD cutoffs were established. Additionally, we compared fractal analysis to conventional apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements. RESULTS: Fractal analysis of perfusion allowed accurate differentiation of non-significant (group 1) and clinically significant (groups 2-5) cancer with a sensitivity of 91% (confidence interval [CI]: 83-96%) and a specificity of 86% (CI: 73-94%). FD correlated linearly with ISUP groups (r(2) = 0.874, p < 0.001). Significant groupwise differences were obtained between low, intermediate, and high ISUP group 1-4 (p

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer among men worldwide. Urinary, bowel, and sexual function, as well as hormonal symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), were prioritised by patients and professionals as part of a core outcome set for localised PCa regardless of treatment type. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in localised PCa and recommend PROMs for use in routine practice and research settings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The psychometric properties of PROMs measuring functional and HRQoL domains used in randomised controlled trials including patients with localised PCa were assessed according to the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology. MEDLINE and Embase were searched to identify publications evaluating psychometric properties of the PROMs. The characteristics and methodological quality of the studies included were extracted, tabulated, and assessed according to the COSMIN criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 27 studies evaluating psychometric properties of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life core 30 (QLQ-C30) and prostate cancer 25 (QLQ-PR25) modules, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and the 36-item (SF-36) and 12-item Short-Form health survey (SF-12) PROMs were identified and included in the systematic review. EPIC and EORTC QLQ-C30, a general module that assesses patients' physical, psychological, and social functions, were characterised by high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.46-0.96 and 0.68-0.94 respectively) but low content validity. EORTC QLQ-PR25, which is primarily designed to assess PCa-specific HRQoL, had moderate content validity and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.39-0.87

Contains fulltext : 283301.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: To determine the value of a deep learning masked (DLM) auto-fixed volume of interest (VOI) segmentation method as an alternative to manual segmentation for radiomics-based diagnosis of clinically significant (CS) prostate cancer (PCa) on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included a retrospective multi-center dataset of 524 PCa lesions (of which 204 are CS PCa) on bpMRI. All lesions were both semi-automatically segmented with a DLM auto-fixed VOI method (averaging < 10 s per lesion) and manually segmented by an expert uroradiologist (averaging 5 min per lesion). The DLM auto-fixed VOI method uses a spherical VOI (with its center at the location of the lowest apparent diffusion coefficient of the prostate lesion as indicated with a single mouse click) from which non-prostate voxels are removed using a deep learning-based prostate segmentation algorithm. Thirteen different DLM auto-fixed VOI diameters (ranging from 6 to 30 mm) were explored. Extracted radiomics data were split into training and test sets (4:1 ratio). Performance was assessed with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: In the test set, the area under the ROC curve (AUCs) of the DLM auto-fixed VOI method with a VOI diameter of 18 mm (0.76 [95% CI: 0.66-0.85]) was significantly higher (p = 0.0198) than that of the manual segmentation method (0.62 [95% CI: 0.52-0.73]). CONCLUSIONS: A DLM auto-fixed VOI segmentation can provide a potentially more accurate radiomics diagnosis of CS PCa than expert manual segmentation while also reducing expert time investment by more than 97%. KEY POINTS: * Compared to traditional expert-based segmentation, a deep learning mask (DLM) auto-fixed VOI placement is more accurate at detecting CS PCa. * Compared to traditional expert-based segmentation, a DLM auto-fixed VOI placement is faster and can result in a 97% time reduction. * Applying deep learning to an auto-fixed VOI radiomics approach can

Contains fulltext : 283328.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Artificial intelligence (AI) for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is starting to play a clinical role for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. AI-assisted reading is feasible, allowing workflow reduction. A total of 3,369 multi-vendor prostate MRI cases are available in open datasets, acquired from 2003 to 2021 in Europe or USA at 3 T (n = 3,018; 89.6%) or 1.5 T (n = 296; 8.8%), 346 cases scanned with endorectal coil (10.3%), 3,023 (89.7%) with phased-array surface coils; 412 collected for anatomical segmentation tasks, 3,096 for PCa detection/classification; for 2,240 cases lesions delineation is available and 56 cases have matching histopathologic images; for 2,620 cases the PSA level is provided; the total size of all open datasets amounts to approximately 253 GB. Of note, quality of annotations provided per dataset highly differ and attention must be paid when using these datasets (e.g., data overlap). Seven grand challenges and commercial applications from eleven vendors are here considered. Few small studies provided prospective validation. More work is needed, in particular validation on large-scale multi-institutional, well-curated public datasets to test general applicability. Moreover, AI needs to be explored for clinical stages other than detection/characterization (e.g., follow-up, prognosis, interventions, and focal treatment).

Contains fulltext : 288442.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: As part of the PIONEER Consortium objectives, we have explored which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are available in relation to our previously defined clinician and patient-reported outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa). DESIGN: We performed a systematic review to identify validated and non-validated studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched on 21 January 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only quantitative studies were included. Single studies with fewer than 50 participants, published before 2014 and looking at outcomes which are not prioritised in the PIONEER core outcome set were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: After initial screening, we extracted data following the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of prognostic factor studies (CHARMS-PF) criteria and discussed the identified factors with a multidisciplinary expert group. The quality of the included papers was scored for applicability and risk of bias using validated tools such as PROBAST, Quality in Prognostic Studies and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. RESULTS: The search identified 6604 studies, from which 489 DPFs were included. Sixty-four of those were internally or externally validated. However, only three studies on diagnostic and seven studies on prognostic factors had a low risk of bias and a low risk concerning applicability. CONCLUSION: Most of the DPFs identified require additional evaluation and validation in properly designed studies before they can be recommended for use in clinical practice. The PIONEER online search tool for DPFs for PCa will enable researchers to understand the quality of the current research and help them design future studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There are no ethical implications.

Contains fulltext : 247178.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 283325.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), estimated to become the second leading cause of cancer deaths in western societies by 2030, was flagged as a neglected cancer by the European Commission and the United States Congress. Due to lack of investment in research and development, combined with a complex and aggressive tumour biology, PDAC overall survival has not significantly improved the past decades. Cross-sectional imaging and histopathology play a crucial role throughout the patient pathway. However, current clinical guidelines for diagnostic workup, patient stratification, treatment response assessment, and follow-up are non-uniform and lack evidence-based consensus. Artificial Intelligence (AI) can leverage multimodal data to improve patient outcomes, but PDAC AI research is too scattered and lacking in quality to be incorporated into clinical workflows. This review describes the patient pathway and derives touchpoints for image-based AI research in collaboration with a multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional expert panel. The literature exploring AI to address these touchpoints is thoroughly retrieved and analysed to identify the existing trends and knowledge gaps. The results show absence of multi-institutional, well-curated datasets, an essential building block for robust AI applications. Furthermore, most research is unimodal, does not use state-of-the-art AI techniques, and lacks reliable ground truth. Based on this, the future research agenda for clinically relevant, image-driven AI in PDAC is proposed.

Contains fulltext : 245173.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Artificial intelligence developments are essential to the successful deployment of community-wide, MRI-driven prostate cancer diagnosis. AI systems should ensure that the main benefits of biopsy avoidance are delivered while maintaining consistent high specificities, at a range of disease prevalences. Since all current artificial intelligence / computer-aided detection systems for prostate cancer detection are experimental, multiple developmental efforts are still needed to bring the vision to fruition. Initial work needs to focus on developing systems as diagnostic supporting aids so their results can be integrated into the radiologists' workflow including gland and target outlining tasks for fusion biopsies. Developing AI systems as clinical decision-making tools will require greater efforts. The latter encompass larger multicentric, multivendor datasets where the different needs of patients stratified by diagnostic settings, disease prevalence, patient preference, and clinical setting are considered. AI-based, robust, standard operating procedures will increase the confidence of patients and payers, thus enabling the wider adoption of the MRI-directed approach for prostate cancer diagnosis. KEY POINTS: * AI systems need to ensure that the benefits of biopsy avoidance are delivered with consistent high specificities, at a range of disease prevalence. * Initial work has focused on developing systems as diagnostic supporting aids for outlining tasks, so they can be integrated into the radiologists' workflow to support MRI-directed biopsies. * Decision support tools require a larger body of work including multicentric, multivendor studies where the clinical needs, disease prevalence, patient preferences, and clinical setting are additionally defined.

Contains fulltext : 239809.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 232893.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), INTRODUCTION: As part of the PIONEER (Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Enhancement Through the Power of Big Data in Europe) Consortium, we will explore which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are currently being researched to previously defined clinical and patient-reported outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This research project will follow the following four steps: (1) a broad systematic literature review of DPFs for all stages of PCa, covering evidence from 2014 onwards; (2) discussion of systematic review findings by a multidisciplinary expert panel; (3) risk of bias assessment and applicability with Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool (QUIPS) and (4) additional quantitative assessments if required. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We aim to develop an online tool to present the DPFs identified in this research and make them available across all stakeholders. There are no ethical implications.

Contains fulltext : 235582.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), 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.