Multicenter Multireader Evaluation of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Attention Mapping System for the Detection of Prostate Cancer With Multiparametric MRI.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate in a multicenter dataset the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) detection system with attention mapping compared with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) interpretation in the detection of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. MRI examinations from five institutions were included in this study and were evaluated by nine readers. In the first round, readers evaluated mpMRI studies using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. After 4 weeks, images were again presented to readers along with the AI-based detection system output. Readers accepted or rejected lesions within four AI-generated attention map boxes. Additional lesions outside of boxes were excluded from detection and categorization. The performances of readers using the mpMRI-only and AI-assisted approaches were compared. RESULTS. The study population included 152 case patients and 84 control patients with 274 pathologically proven cancer lesions. The lesion-based AUC was 74.9% for MRI and 77.5% for AI with no significant difference (p = 0.095). The sensitivity for overall detection of cancer lesions was higher for AI than for mpMRI but did not reach statistical significance (57.4% vs 53.6%, p = 0.073). However, for transition zone lesions, sensitivity was higher for AI than for MRI (61.8% vs 50.8%, p = 0.001). Reading time was longer for AI than for MRI (4.66 vs 4.03 minutes, p < 0.001). There was moderate interreader agreement for AI and MRI with no significant difference (58.7% vs 58.5%, p = 0.966). CONCLUSION. Overall sensitivity was only minimally improved by use of the AI system. Significant improvement was achieved, however, in the detection of transition zone lesions with use of the AI system at the cost of a mean of 40 seconds of additional reading time.

Comparative study between monoexponential and biexponential diffusion weighted imaging sequences in multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To compare qualitatively and quantitatively, in terms of image quality, a new biexponential diffusion sequence protocol with the standard monoexponential diffusion protocol on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: This study had a prospective data collection and cross-sectional analysis. Between August and November 2017, a total of 70 patients who underwent multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging due to clinical suspicion of prostatic neoplasia were recruited. The images obtained were evaluated by two independent readers regarding subjective/qualitative criteria (six criteria) and objective/quantitative criteria (three criteria), always comparing the monoexponential to biexponential acquisition protocols. The results were compared by statistical analysis (interobserver agreement - Gwet coefficient; analysis of the qualitative variables - Stuart-Maxwell test; and analysis of the quantitative variables - Wilcoxon test). RESULTS: After exclusion of four patients, the final sample consisted of 66 patients. A good/excellent inter observer agreement was stablished for subjective criteria (except in one criteria). For the qualitative analysis the amount of good or excellent evaluations was higher for the monoexponential protocol (except in one category), with evidence of significant differences for three criteria (diffusion weighted imaging global quality; diffusion weighted imaging signal-to-noise ratio; and apparent diffusion coefficient signal-to-noise ratio). For the quantitative data analysis, the monoexponential protocol showed less variability of the anteroposterior diameters, meaning less distortion of the images, and better estimated signal-to-noise ratio. CONCLUSION: In our data, the quality of the images of the monoexponential standard diffusion sequence was qualitatively and quantitatively superior to those of the biexponential diffusion weighted imaging sequence.

Interobserver Agreement and Positivity of PI-RADS Version 2 Among Radiologists with Different Levels of Experience.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate interobserver agreement of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 category among radiologists with different levels of experience. The secondary objective was to evaluate the positivity for significant cancer among each category (splitting category 4 into two) and among different lesion sizes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board and ethics comitee approved retrospective study. Eight radiologists with different levels of experienced in prostatic magnetic resonance imaging-two more experienced, four with intermediate experience, and two abdominal radiology fellows-interpreted 160 lesions. Reference standard was fusion-targeted biopsy. Percentage agreement, k coefficients, and analysis concordance were used. RESULTS: Coefficient of concordance according to categories was 0.71 considering both zones, 0.72 for peripheral zone (PZ) and 0.44 for peripheral zone (TZ). Agreement for PI-RADS score of 3 or greater was 0.48 in PZ and 0.57 in TZ. Tumor positivity rates were 54.3% and 66.0% for PI-RADS 3 + 1 and 4 for PZ, respectively; and 25.0 and 49.2% for PI-RADS 3 + 1 and 4 for TZ, respectively (p < 0.001 in both analysis). Lesions <10, 10-14, and ≥15 mm had 55.3%, 74.6%, and 93.5% of positivity rates for cancer in PZ (p = 0.002 and <0.001) and 26.7%, 56.5%, and 59.6% in TZ, respectively (p = 0.245 and 0.632). Sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer using PI-RADS v2 were 76%, 72%, and 74% for PZ; and 76%, 69%, and 71% for TZ, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study shows that PI-RADS v2 has overall good interobserver agreement among radiologists with different levels of experience. PI-RADS category 3 + 1 showed lower positivity rates for significant cancer compared to category 4. Lastly, lesions 10-14 mm has similar positivity rates compared to ≥15 mm for TZ lesions.

Comparative study between monoexponential and biexponential diffusion weighted imaging sequences in multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging / Estudo comparativo entre as sequências de difusão monoexponencial e biexponencial na ressonância magnética multiparamétrica da próstata

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare qualitatively and quantitatively, in terms of image quality, a new biexponential diffusion sequence protocol with the standard monoexponential diffusion protocol on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging. Methods: This study had a prospective data collection and cross-sectional analysis. Between August and November 2017, a total of 70 patients who underwent multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging due to clinical suspicion of prostatic neoplasia were recruited. The images obtained were evaluated by two independent readers regarding subjective/qualitative criteria (six criteria) and objective/quantitative criteria (three criteria), always comparing the monoexponential to biexponential acquisition protocols. The results were compared by statistical analysis (interobserver agreement − Gwet coefficient; analysis of the qualitative variables − Stuart-Maxwell test; and analysis of the quantitative variables − Wilcoxon test). Results: After exclusion of four patients, the final sample consisted of 66 patients. A good/excellent inter observer agreement was stablished for subjective criteria (except in one criteria). For the qualitative analysis the amount of good or excellent evaluations was higher for the monoexponential protocol (except in one category), with evidence of significant differences for three criteria (diffusion weighted imaging global quality; diffusion weighted imaging signal-to-noise ratio; and apparent diffusion coefficient signal-to-noise ratio). For the quantitative data analysis, the monoexponential protocol showed less variability of the anteroposterior diameters, meaning less distortion of the images, and better estimated signal-to-noise ratio. Conclusion: In our data, the quality of the images of the monoexponential standard diffusion sequence was qualitatively and quantitatively superior to those of the biexponential diffusion weighted imaging sequence.

RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar qualitativa e quantitativamente, em termos de qualidade de imagem, um novo protocolo de sequência de difusão biexponencial com o protocolo de difusão monoexponencial padrão, em ressonância magnética multiparamétrica da próstata. Métodos: Estudo com coleta prospectiva e análise transversal. Entre agosto e novembro de 2017, foram recrutados 70 pacientes que realizaram ressonância magnética multiparamétrica da próstata, por suspeita de neoplasia prostática. As imagens obtidas por ambas as sequências foram avaliadas por dois leitores independentes, quanto a critérios de avaliação subjetiva/qualitativa (seis critérios) e objetiva/quantitativa (três critérios), sempre comparando os protocolos de aquisição monoexponencial e biexponencial. Os resultados foram comparados por análise estatística (concordância interobservador − coeficiente de Gwet; análise das variáveis qualitativas − teste de Stuart-Maxwell; e análise das variáveis quantitativas − testes de Wilcoxon). Resultados: Após exclusão de quatro pacientes, a amostra final foi composta por 66 pacientes. Uma boa/excelente concordância interobservador foi estabelecida para critérios subjetivos (exceto em um critério). Para a análise qualitativa, a quantidade de avaliações boas ou excelentes foi maior para o protocolo monoexponencial (exceto em uma categoria), com evidências de diferenças significativas para três critérios (qualidade global da imagem ponderada em difusão, relação sinal-ruído na imagem ponderada em difusão e relação sinal-ruído ADC). Para a análise quantitativa dos dados, o protocolo monoexponencial apresentou menor variabilidade dos diâmetros anteroposteriores, o que significou menos distorção das imagens, e melhor relação sinal-ruído estimada. Conclusão: Em nossos dados, a qualidade das imagens da sequência de difusão padrão monoexponencial foi qualitativa e quantitativamente superior àquelas da sequência teste biexponencial.