Search

Purpose: To determine the predictive performance of the integrated model based on clinical factors and radiomic features for the accurate identification of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) among Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of 103 patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions who underwent pre-operative 3.0-T MRI was performed. Patients were randomly divided into the training set and the testing set at a ratio of 7:3. Radiomic features were extracted from axial T2WI, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) images of each patient. The minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) feature selection methods were used to identify the radiomic features and construct a radiomic model for csPCa identification. Moreover, multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to integrate the clinical factors with radiomic feature model to further improve the accuracy of csPCa identification, and the two are presented in the form of normogram. The performance of the integrated model was compared with radiomic model and clinical model on testing set. Results: A total of four radiomic features were selected and used for radiomic model construction producing a radiomic score (Radscore). Radscore was significantly different between the csPCa and the non-csPCa patients (training set: p < 0.001; testing set: p = 0.035). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that age and PSA could be used as independent predictors for csPCa identification. The clinical–radiomic model produced the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) in the testing set was 0.88 (95%CI, 0.75–1.00), which was similar to clinical model (AUC = 0.85; 95%CI, 0.52–0.90) (p = 0.048) and higher than the radiomic model (AUC = 0.71; 95%CI, 0.68–1.00) (p < 0.001). The decision curve analysis implies that the clinical–radiomic model could be beneficial in identifying csPCa among PI-RADS 3 lesions. Conclusion: The clinical–radiomic model could effectively identify csPCa among biparametric PI-RADS 3 lesions and thus could help avoid unnecessary biopsy and improve the life quality of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PurposeTo determine the predictive performance of the integrated model based on clinical factors and radiomic features for the accurate identification of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) among Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions.Materials and MethodsA retrospective study of 103 patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions who underwent pre-operative 3.0-T MRI was performed. Patients were randomly divided into the training set and the testing set at a ratio of 7:3. Radiomic features were extracted from axial T2WI, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) images of each patient. The minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) feature selection methods were used to identify the radiomic features and construct a radiomic model for csPCa identification. Moreover, multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to integrate the clinical factors with radiomic feature model to further improve the accuracy of csPCa identification, and the two are presented in the form of normogram. The performance of the integrated model was compared with radiomic model and clinical model on testing set.ResultsA total of four radiomic features were selected and used for radiomic model construction producing a radiomic score (Radscore). Radscore was significantly different between the csPCa and the non-csPCa patients (training set: p < 0.001; testing set: p = 0.035). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that age and PSA could be used as independent predictors for csPCa identification. The clinical–radiomic model produced the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) in the testing set was 0.88 (95%CI, 0.75–1.00), which was similar to clinical model (AUC = 0.85; 95%CI, 0.52–0.90) (p = 0.048) and higher than the radiomic model (AUC = 0.71; 95%CI, 0.68–1.00) (p < 0.001). The decision curve analysis implies that the clinical–radiomic model could be beneficial in identifying csPCa among PI-RADS 3 lesions.ConclusionThe clinical–radiomic model could effectively identify csPCa among biparametric PI-RADS 3 lesions and thus could help avoid unnecessary biopsy and improve the life quality of patients.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the value of combining bpMRI and clinical indicators in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), and developing a prediction model and Nomogram to guide clinical decision-making.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 530 patients who underwent prostate biopsy due to elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and/or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to the training group (n = 371, 70%) and validation group (n = 159, 30%). All patients underwent prostate bpMRI examination, and T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequences were collected before biopsy and were scored, which were respectively named T2WI score and DWI score according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v.2) scoring protocol, and then PI-RADS scoring was performed. We defined a new bpMRI-based parameter named Total score (Total score = T2WI score + DWI score). PI-RADS score and Total score were separately included in the multivariate analysis of the training group to determine independent predictors for csPCa and establish prediction models. Then, prediction models and clinical indicators were compared by analyzing the area under the curve (AUC) and decision curves. A Nomogram for predicting csPCa was established using data from the training group.ResultsIn the training group, 160 (43.1%) patients had prostate cancer (PCa), including 128 (34.5%) with csPCa. Multivariate regression analysis showed that the PI-RADS score, Total score, f/tPSA, and PSA density (PSAD) were independent predictors of csPCa. The prediction model that was defined by Total score, f/tPSA, and PSAD had the highest discriminatory power of csPCa (AUC = 0.931), and the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 85.1% and 87.5%, respectively. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed that the prediction model achieved an optimal overall net benefit in both the training group and the validation group. In addition, the Nomogram predicted csPCa revealed good estimation when compared with clinical indicators.ConclusionThe prediction model and Nomogram based on bpMRI and clinical indicators exhibit a satisfactory predictive value and improved risk stratification for csPCa, which could be used for clinical biopsy decision-making.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the value of combining bpMRI and clinical indicators in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), and developing a prediction model and Nomogram to guide clinical decision-making. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 530 patients who underwent prostate biopsy due to elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and/or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to the training group (n = 371, 70%) and validation group (n = 159, 30%). All patients underwent prostate bpMRI examination, and T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequences were collected before biopsy and were scored, which were respectively named T2WI score and DWI score according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v.2) scoring protocol, and then PI-RADS scoring was performed. We defined a new bpMRI-based parameter named Total score (Total score = T2WI score + DWI score). PI-RADS score and Total score were separately included in the multivariate analysis of the training group to determine independent predictors for csPCa and establish prediction models. Then, prediction models and clinical indicators were compared by analyzing the area under the curve (AUC) and decision curves. A Nomogram for predicting csPCa was established using data from the training group. Results: In the training group, 160 (43.1%) patients had prostate cancer (PCa), including 128 (34.5%) with csPCa. Multivariate regression analysis showed that the PI-RADS score, Total score, f/tPSA, and PSA density (PSAD) were independent predictors of csPCa. The prediction model that was defined by Total score, f/tPSA, and PSAD had the highest discriminatory power of csPCa (AUC = 0.931), and the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 85.1% and 87.5%, respectively. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed that the prediction model achieved an optimal overall net benefit in both the training group and the validation group. In addition, the Nomogram predicted csPCa revealed good estimation when compared with clinical indicators. Conclusion: The prediction model and Nomogram based on bpMRI and clinical indicators exhibit a satisfactory predictive value and improved risk stratification for csPCa, which could be used for clinical biopsy decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]