Cargando…

Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was: To test whether machine learning classifiers for transition zone (TZ) and peripheral zone (PZ) can correctly classify prostate tumors into those with/without a Gleason 4 component, and to compare the performance of the best performing classifiers against the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Antonelli, Michela, Johnston, Edward W., Dikaios, Nikolaos, Cheung, King K., Sidhu, Harbir S., Appayya, Mrishta B., Giganti, Francesco, Simmons, Lucy A. M., Freeman, Alex, Allen, Clare, Ahmed, Hashim U., Atkinson, David, Ourselin, Sebastien, Punwani, Shonit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6682575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31187216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06244-2
_version_ 1783441911344791552
author Antonelli, Michela
Johnston, Edward W.
Dikaios, Nikolaos
Cheung, King K.
Sidhu, Harbir S.
Appayya, Mrishta B.
Giganti, Francesco
Simmons, Lucy A. M.
Freeman, Alex
Allen, Clare
Ahmed, Hashim U.
Atkinson, David
Ourselin, Sebastien
Punwani, Shonit
author_facet Antonelli, Michela
Johnston, Edward W.
Dikaios, Nikolaos
Cheung, King K.
Sidhu, Harbir S.
Appayya, Mrishta B.
Giganti, Francesco
Simmons, Lucy A. M.
Freeman, Alex
Allen, Clare
Ahmed, Hashim U.
Atkinson, David
Ourselin, Sebastien
Punwani, Shonit
author_sort Antonelli, Michela
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was: To test whether machine learning classifiers for transition zone (TZ) and peripheral zone (PZ) can correctly classify prostate tumors into those with/without a Gleason 4 component, and to compare the performance of the best performing classifiers against the opinion of three board-certified radiologists. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data was performed at a single center between 2012 and 2015. Inclusion criteria were (i) 3-T mp-MRI compliant with international guidelines, (ii) Likert ≥ 3/5 lesion, (iii) transperineal template ± targeted index lesion biopsy confirming cancer ≥ Gleason 3 + 3. Index lesions from 164 men were analyzed (119 PZ, 45 TZ). Quantitative MRI and clinical features were used and zone-specific machine learning classifiers were constructed. Models were validated using a fivefold cross-validation and a temporally separated patient cohort. Classifier performance was compared against the opinion of three board-certified radiologists. RESULTS: The best PZ classifier trained with prostate-specific antigen density, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and maximum enhancement (ME) on DCE-MRI obtained a ROC area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83 following fivefold cross-validation. Diagnostic sensitivity at 50% threshold of specificity was higher for the best PZ model (0.93) when compared with the mean sensitivity of the three radiologists (0.72). The best TZ model used ADC and ME to obtain an AUC of 0.75 following fivefold cross-validation. This achieved higher diagnostic sensitivity at 50% threshold of specificity (0.88) than the mean sensitivity of the three radiologists (0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning classifiers predict Gleason pattern 4 in prostate tumors better than radiologists. KEY POINTS: • Predictive models developed from quantitative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging regarding the characterization of prostate cancer grade should be zone-specific. • Classifiers trained differently for peripheral and transition zone can predict a Gleason 4 component with a higher performance than the subjective opinion of experienced radiologists. • Classifiers would be particularly useful in the context of active surveillance, whereby decisions regarding whether to biopsy are necessitated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6682575
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66825752019-08-19 Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists Antonelli, Michela Johnston, Edward W. Dikaios, Nikolaos Cheung, King K. Sidhu, Harbir S. Appayya, Mrishta B. Giganti, Francesco Simmons, Lucy A. M. Freeman, Alex Allen, Clare Ahmed, Hashim U. Atkinson, David Ourselin, Sebastien Punwani, Shonit Eur Radiol Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was: To test whether machine learning classifiers for transition zone (TZ) and peripheral zone (PZ) can correctly classify prostate tumors into those with/without a Gleason 4 component, and to compare the performance of the best performing classifiers against the opinion of three board-certified radiologists. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data was performed at a single center between 2012 and 2015. Inclusion criteria were (i) 3-T mp-MRI compliant with international guidelines, (ii) Likert ≥ 3/5 lesion, (iii) transperineal template ± targeted index lesion biopsy confirming cancer ≥ Gleason 3 + 3. Index lesions from 164 men were analyzed (119 PZ, 45 TZ). Quantitative MRI and clinical features were used and zone-specific machine learning classifiers were constructed. Models were validated using a fivefold cross-validation and a temporally separated patient cohort. Classifier performance was compared against the opinion of three board-certified radiologists. RESULTS: The best PZ classifier trained with prostate-specific antigen density, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and maximum enhancement (ME) on DCE-MRI obtained a ROC area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83 following fivefold cross-validation. Diagnostic sensitivity at 50% threshold of specificity was higher for the best PZ model (0.93) when compared with the mean sensitivity of the three radiologists (0.72). The best TZ model used ADC and ME to obtain an AUC of 0.75 following fivefold cross-validation. This achieved higher diagnostic sensitivity at 50% threshold of specificity (0.88) than the mean sensitivity of the three radiologists (0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning classifiers predict Gleason pattern 4 in prostate tumors better than radiologists. KEY POINTS: • Predictive models developed from quantitative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging regarding the characterization of prostate cancer grade should be zone-specific. • Classifiers trained differently for peripheral and transition zone can predict a Gleason 4 component with a higher performance than the subjective opinion of experienced radiologists. • Classifiers would be particularly useful in the context of active surveillance, whereby decisions regarding whether to biopsy are necessitated. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-06-11 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6682575/ /pubmed/31187216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06244-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence
Antonelli, Michela
Johnston, Edward W.
Dikaios, Nikolaos
Cheung, King K.
Sidhu, Harbir S.
Appayya, Mrishta B.
Giganti, Francesco
Simmons, Lucy A. M.
Freeman, Alex
Allen, Clare
Ahmed, Hashim U.
Atkinson, David
Ourselin, Sebastien
Punwani, Shonit
Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
title Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
title_full Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
title_fullStr Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
title_full_unstemmed Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
title_short Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
title_sort machine learning classifiers can predict gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
topic Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6682575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31187216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06244-2
work_keys_str_mv AT antonellimichela machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT johnstonedwardw machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT dikaiosnikolaos machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT cheungkingk machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT sidhuharbirs machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT appayyamrishtab machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT gigantifrancesco machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT simmonslucyam machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT freemanalex machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT allenclare machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT ahmedhashimu machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT atkinsondavid machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT ourselinsebastien machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists
AT punwanishonit machinelearningclassifierscanpredictgleasonpattern4prostatecancerwithgreateraccuracythanexperiencedradiologists