Radiomics vs radiologist in prostate cancer. Results from a systematic review
- PMID: 36867239
- DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04305-2
Radiomics vs radiologist in prostate cancer. Results from a systematic review
Abstract
Purpose: Radiomics in uro-oncology is a rapidly evolving science proving to be a novel approach for optimizing the analysis of massive data from medical images to provide auxiliary guidance in clinical issues. This scoping review aimed to identify key aspects wherein radiomics can potentially improve the accuracy of diagnosis, staging, and extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer (PCa).
Methods: The literature search was performed on June 2022 using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Controlled Register of Trials. Studies were included if radiomics were compared with radiological reports only.
Results: Seventeen papers were included. The combination of PIRADS and radiomics score models improves the PIRADS score reporting of 2 and 3 lesions even in the peripheral zone. Multiparametric MRI-based radiomics models suggest that by simply omitting diffusion contrast enhancement imaging in radiomics models can simplify the process of analysis of clinically significant PCa by PIRADS. Radiomics features correlated with the Gleason grade with excellent discriminative ability. Radiomics has higher accuracy in predicting not only the presence but also the side of extraprostatic extension.
Conclusions: Radiomics research on PCa mainly uses MRI as an imaging modality and is focused on diagnosis and risk stratification and has the best future possibility of improving PIRADS reporting. Radiomics has established its superiority over radiologist-reported outcomes but the variability has to be taken into consideration before translating it to clinical practice.
Keywords: Computer-assisted; Diagnosis; Neoplasm staging; Prostatic neoplasms; Radiomics.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71:209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Venderink W, Govers TM, de Rooij M et al (2017) Cost-effectiveness comparison of imaging-guided prostate biopsy techniques: systematic transrectal ultrasound, direct in-bore MRI, and image fusion. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:1058–1063. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17322 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Loch T, Leuschner I, Genberg C et al (1999) Artificial neural network analysis (ANNA) of prostatic transrectal ultrasound. Prostate 39:198–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0045(19990515)39:3%3c198::aid-pros8%3... - DOI - PubMed
-
- Lorusso V, Kabre B, Pignot G et al (2022) External validation of the computerized analysis of TRUS of the prostate with the ANNA/C-TRUS system: a potential role of artificial intelligence for improving prostate cancer detection. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-03965-w - DOI - PubMed
-
- Tokas T, Grabski B, Paul U et al (2018) A 12-year follow-up of ANNA/C-TRUS image-targeted biopsies in patients suspicious for prostate cancer. World J Urol 36:699–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2160-z - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
