Aggressiveness classification of clear cell renal cell carcinoma using registration-independent radiology-pathology correlation learning.

BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a common cancer that varies in clinical behavior. Clear cell RCC (ccRCC) is the most common RCC subtype, with both aggressive and indolent manifestations. Indolent ccRCC is often low-grade without necrosis and can be monitored without treatment. Aggressive ccRCC is often high-grade and can cause metastasis and death if not promptly detected and treated. While most RCCs are detected on computed tomography (CT) scans, aggressiveness classification is based on pathology images acquired from invasive biopsy or surgery. PURPOSE: CT imaging-based aggressiveness classification would be an important clinical advance, as it would facilitate non-invasive risk stratification and treatment planning. Here, we present a novel machine learning method, Correlated Feature Aggregation By Region (CorrFABR), for CT-based aggressiveness classification of ccRCC. METHODS: CorrFABR is a multimodal fusion algorithm that learns from radiology and pathology images, and clinical variables in a clinically-relevant manner. CorrFABR leverages registration-independent radiology (CT) and pathology image correlations using features from vision transformer-based foundation models to facilitate aggressiveness assessment on CT images. CorrFABR consists of three main steps: (a) Feature aggregation where region-level features are extracted from radiology and pathology images at widely varying image resolutions, (b) Fusion where radiology features correlated with pathology features (pathology-informed CT biomarkers) are learned, and (c) Classification where the learned pathology-informed CT biomarkers, together with clinical variables of tumor diameter, gender, and age, are used to distinguish aggressive from indolent ccRCC using multi-layer perceptron-based classifiers. Pathology images are only required in the first two steps of CorrFABR, and are not required in the prediction module. Therefore, CorrFABR integrates information from CT images, pathology images, and clinical variables during training, but for inference, it relies solely on CT images and clinical variables, ensuring its clinical applicability. CorrFABR was trained with heterogenous, publicly-available data from 298 ccRCC tumors (136 indolent tumors, 162 aggressive tumors) in a five-fold cross-validation setup and evaluated on an independent test set of 74 tumors with a balanced distribution of aggressive and indolent tumors. Ablation studies were performed to test the utility of each component of CorrFABR. RESULTS: CorrFABR outperformed the other classification methods, achieving an ROC-AUC (area under the curve) of 0.855 ± 0.0005 (95% confidence interval: 0.775, 0.947), F1-score of 0.793 ± 0.029, sensitivity of 0.741 ± 0.058, and specificity of 0.876 ± 0.032 in classifying ccRCC as aggressive or indolent subtypes. It was found that pathology-informed CT biomarkers learned through registration-independent correlation learning improves classification performance over using CT features alone, irrespective of the kind of features or the classification model used. Tumor diameter, gender, and age provide complementary clinical information, and integrating pathology-informed CT biomarkers with these clinical variables further improves performance. CONCLUSION: CorrFABR provides a novel method for CT-based aggressiveness classification of ccRCC by enabling the identification of pathology-informed CT biomarkers, and integrating them with clinical variables. CorrFABR enables learning of these pathology-informed CT biomarkers through a novel registration-independent correlation learning module that considers unaligned radiology and pathology images at widely varying image resolutions.

Trends in pre-biopsy MRI usage for prostate cancer detection, 2007-2022.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines favor MRI before prostate biopsy due to proven benefits. However, adoption patterns across the US are unclear. METHODS: This study used the Merative™ Marketscan® Commercial & Medicare Databases to analyze 872,829 prostate biopsies in 726,663 men from 2007-2022. Pre-biopsy pelvic MRI within 90 days was the primary outcome. Descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations assessed changes over time, urban-rural differences, and state-level variation. RESULTS: Pre-biopsy MRI utilization increased significantly from 0.5% in 2007 to 35.5% in 2022, with faster adoption in urban areas (36.1% in 2022) versus rural areas (28.3% in 2022). Geographic disparities were notable, with higher utilization in California, New York, and Minnesota, and lower rates in the Southeast and Mountain West. CONCLUSIONS: The study reveals a paradigm shift in prostate cancer diagnostics towards MRI-guided approaches, influenced by evolving guidelines and clinical evidence. Disparities in access, particularly in rural areas and specific regions, highlight the need for targeted interventions to ensure equitable access to advanced diagnostic techniques.

Stockholm3 in a Multiethnic Cohort for Prostate Cancer Detection (SEPTA): A Prospective Multicentered Trial.

PURPOSE: Asian, Black, and Hispanic men are underrepresented in prostate cancer (PCa) clinical trials. Few novel prostate cancer biomarkers have been validated in diverse cohorts. We aimed to determine if Stockholm3 can improve prostate cancer detection in a diverse cohort. METHODS: An observational prospective multicentered (17 sites) clinical trial (2019-2023), supplemented by prospectively recruited participants (2008-2020) in a urology clinic setting included men with suspicion of PCa and underwent prostate biopsy. Before biopsy, sample was collected for measurement of the Stockholm3 risk score. Parameters include prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, KLK2, GDF15, PSP94, germline risk (single-nucleotide polymorphisms), age, family history, and previous negative biopsy. The primary endpoint was detection of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade ≥2 cancer (clinically significant PCa, csPC). The two primary aims were to (1) demonstrate noninferior sensitivity (0.8 lower bound 95% CI noninferiority margin) in detecting csPC using Stockholm3 compared with PSA (relative sensitivity) and (2) demonstrate superior specificity by reducing biopsies with benign results or low-grade cancers (relative specificity). RESULTS: A total of 2,129 biopsied participants were included: Asian (16%, 350), Black or African American (Black; 24%, 505), Hispanic or Latino and White (Hispanic; 14%, 305), and non-Hispanic or non-Latino and White (White; 46%, 969). Overall, Stockholm3 showed noninferior sensitivity compared with PSA ≥4 ng/mL (relative sensitivity: 0.95 [95% CI, 0.92 to 0.99]) and nearly three times higher specificity (relative specificity: 2.91 [95% CI, 2.63 to 3.22]). Results were consistent across racial and ethnic subgroups: noninferior sensitivity (0.91-0.98) and superior specificity (2.51-4.70). Compared with PSA, Stockholm3 could reduce benign and ISUP 1 biopsies by 45% overall and between 42% and 52% across racial and ethnic subgroups. CONCLUSION: In a substantially diverse population, Stockholm3 significantly reduces unnecessary prostate biopsies while maintaining a similar sensitivity to PSA in detecting csPC.

Inter-reader Agreement for Prostate Cancer Detection Using Micro-ultrasound: A Multi-institutional Study.

Background and objective: Micro-ultrasound (MUS) uses a high-frequency transducer with superior resolution to conventional ultrasound, which may differentiate prostate cancer from normal tissue and thereby allow targeted biopsy. Preliminary evidence has shown comparable sensitivity to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), but consistency between users has yet to be described. Our objective was to assess agreement of MUS interpretation across multiple readers. Methods: After institutional review board approval, we prospectively collected MUS images for 57 patients referred for prostate biopsy after multiparametric MRI from 2022 to 2023. MUS images were interpreted by six urologists at four institutions with varying experience (range 2-6 yr). Readers were blinded to MRI results and clinical data. The primary outcome was reader agreement on the locations of suspicious lesions, measured in terms of Light's κ and positive percent agreement (PPA). Reader sensitivity for identification of grade group (GG) ≥2 prostate cancer was a secondary outcome. Key findings and limitations: Analysis revealed a κ value of 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.39). PPA was 33% (95% CI 25-42%). The mean patient-level sensitivity for GG ≥2 cancer was 0.66 ± 0.05 overall and 0.87 ± 0.09 when cases with anterior lesions were excluded. Readers were 12 times more likely to detect higher-grade cancers (GG ≥3), with higher levels of agreement for this subgroup (κ 0.41, PPA 45%). Key limitations include the inability to prospectively biopsy reader-delineated targets and the inability of readers to perform live transducer maneuvers. Conclusions and clinical implications: Inter-reader agreement on the location of suspicious lesions on MUS is lower than rates previously reported for MRI. MUS sensitivity for cancer in the anterior gland is lacking. Patient summary: The ability to find cancer on imaging scans can vary between doctors. We found that there was frequent disagreement on the location of prostate cancer when doctors were using a new high-resolution scan method called micro-ultrasound. This suggests that the performance of micro-ultrasound is not yet consistent enough to replace MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) for diagnosis of prostate cancer.

External validation of an artificial intelligence model for Gleason grading of prostate cancer on prostatectomy specimens.

OBJECTIVES: To externally validate the performance of the DeepDx Prostate artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm (Deep Bio Inc., Seoul, South Korea) for Gleason grading on whole-mount prostate histopathology, considering potential variations observed when applying AI models trained on biopsy samples to radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens due to inherent differences in tissue representation and sample size. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The commercially available DeepDx Prostate AI algorithm is an automated Gleason grading system that was previously trained using 1133 prostate core biopsy images and validated on 700 biopsy images from two institutions. We assessed the AI algorithm's performance, which outputs Gleason patterns (3, 4, or 5), on 500 1-mm2 tiles created from 150 whole-mount RP specimens from a third institution. These patterns were then grouped into grade groups (GGs) for comparison with expert pathologist assessments. The reference standard was the International Society of Urological Pathology GG as established by two experienced uropathologists with a third expert to adjudicate discordant cases. We defined the main metric as the agreement with the reference standard, using Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: The agreement between the two experienced pathologists in determining GGs at the tile level had a quadratically weighted Cohen's kappa of 0.94. The agreement between the AI algorithm and the reference standard in differentiating cancerous vs non-cancerous tissue had an unweighted Cohen's kappa of 0.91. Additionally, the AI algorithm's agreement with the reference standard in classifying tiles into GGs had a quadratically weighted Cohen's kappa of 0.89. In distinguishing cancerous vs non-cancerous tissue, the AI algorithm achieved a sensitivity of 0.997 and specificity of 0.88; in classifying GG ≥2 vs GG 1 and non-cancerous tissue, it demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.98 and specificity of 0.85. CONCLUSION: The DeepDx Prostate AI algorithm had excellent agreement with expert uropathologists and performance in cancer identification and grading on RP specimens, despite being trained on biopsy specimens from an entirely different patient population.

Patient Preferences for Benefit and Risk Associated With High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for the Ablation of Prostate Tissue in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Food and Drug Administration must make decisions about emerging high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) devices that may lack relevant clinical oncologic data but present with known side effects. This study aims to capture patients' perspective by quantifying their preferences regarding the available benefit and important side effects associated with HIFU for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preferences for HIFU outcomes were examined using a discrete choice experiment survey. Participants were asked to choose a preferred treatment option in 9 choice questions. Each included a pair of hypothetical treatment profiles that have similar attributes/outcomes with varying levels. Outcomes included prostate biopsy outcome and treatment-related risks of erectile dysfunction (ED) and urinary incontinence (UI). We calculated the maximum risk of side effect patients were willing to tolerate in exchange for increased benefit. Preferences were further explored via clinical and demographic data. RESULTS: About 223 subjects with a mean age of 64.8 years completed the survey. Respondents were willing to accept a 1.51%-point increase in new ED risk for a 1%-point increase in favorable biopsy outcome. They were also willing to accept a 0.93%-point increase in new UI risk for a 1%-point increase in biopsy outcome. Subjects who perceived their cancer to be more aggressive had higher risk tolerance for UI. Younger men were willing to tolerate less ED risk than older men. Respondents with greater than college level of education had a lower risk tolerance for ED or UI. CONCLUSIONS: Results may inform development and regulatory evaluation for future HIFU ablation devices by providing supplemental information from the patient perspective.

RAPHIA: A deep learning pipeline for the registration of MRI and whole-mount histopathology images of the prostate.

Image registration can map the ground truth extent of prostate cancer from histopathology images onto MRI, facilitating the development of machine learning methods for early prostate cancer detection. Here, we present RAdiology PatHology Image Alignment (RAPHIA), an end-to-end pipeline for efficient and accurate registration of MRI and histopathology images. RAPHIA automates several time-consuming manual steps in existing approaches including prostate segmentation, estimation of the rotation angle and horizontal flipping in histopathology images, and estimation of MRI-histopathology slice correspondences. By utilizing deep learning registration networks, RAPHIA substantially reduces computational time. Furthermore, RAPHIA obviates the need for a multimodal image similarity metric by transferring histopathology image representations to MRI image representations and vice versa. With the assistance of RAPHIA, novice users achieved expert-level performance, and their mean error in estimating histopathology rotation angle was reduced by 51% (12 degrees vs 8 degrees), their mean accuracy of estimating histopathology flipping was increased by 5% (95.3% vs 100%), and their mean error in estimating MRI-histopathology slice correspondences was reduced by 45% (1.12 slices vs 0.62 slices). When compared to a recent conventional registration approach and a deep learning registration approach, RAPHIA achieved better mapping of histopathology cancer labels, with an improved mean Dice coefficient of cancer regions outlined on MRI and the deformed histopathology (0.44 vs 0.48 vs 0.50), and a reduced mean per-case processing time (51 vs 11 vs 4.5 min). The improved performance by RAPHIA allows efficient processing of large datasets for the development of machine learning models for prostate cancer detection on MRI. Our code is publicly available at: https://github.com/pimed/RAPHIA.

Prediction and Mapping of Intraprostatic Tumor Extent with Artificial Intelligence.

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) underestimation of prostate cancer extent complicates the definition of focal treatment margins. Objective: To validate focal treatment margins produced by an artificial intelligence (AI) model. Design setting and participants: Testing was conducted retrospectively in an independent dataset of 50 consecutive patients who had radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk cancer. An AI deep learning model incorporated multimodal imaging and biopsy data to produce three-dimensional cancer estimation maps and margins. AI margins were compared with conventional MRI regions of interest (ROIs), 10-mm margins around ROIs, and hemigland margins. The AI model also furnished predictions of negative surgical margin probability, which were assessed for accuracy. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Comparing AI with conventional margins, sensitivity was evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and negative margin rates using chi-square tests. Predicted versus observed negative margin probability was assessed using linear regression. Clinically significant prostate cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology grade ≥2) delineated on whole-mount histopathology served as ground truth. Results and limitations: The mean sensitivity for cancer-bearing voxels was higher for AI margins (97%) than for conventional ROIs (37%, p < 0.001), 10-mm ROI margins (93%, p = 0.24), and hemigland margins (94%, p < 0.001). For index lesions, AI margins were more often negative (90%) than conventional ROIs (0%, p < 0.001), 10-mm ROI margins (82%, p = 0.24), and hemigland margins (66%, p = 0.004). Predicted and observed negative margin probabilities were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.98, median error = 4%). Limitations include a validation dataset derived from a single institution's prostatectomy population. Conclusions: The AI model was accurate and effective in an independent test set. This approach could improve and standardize treatment margin definition, potentially reducing cancer recurrence rates. Furthermore, an accurate assessment of negative margin probability could facilitate informed decision-making for patients and physicians. Patient summary: Artificial intelligence was used to predict the extent of tumors in surgically removed prostate specimens. It predicted tumor margins more accurately than conventional methods.

Distinguishing Renal Cell Carcinoma From Normal Kidney Tissue Using Mass Spectrometry Imaging Combined With Machine Learning.

PURPOSE: Accurately distinguishing renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from normal kidney tissue is critical for identifying positive surgical margins (PSMs) during partial and radical nephrectomy, which remains the primary intervention for localized RCC. Techniques that detect PSM with higher accuracy and faster turnaround time than intraoperative frozen section (IFS) analysis can help decrease reoperation rates, relieve patient anxiety and costs, and potentially improve patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here, we extended our combined desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry imaging (DESI-MSI) and machine learning methodology to identify metabolite and lipid species from tissue surfaces that can distinguish normal tissues from clear cell RCC (ccRCC), papillary RCC (pRCC), and chromophobe RCC (chRCC) tissues. RESULTS: From 24 normal and 40 renal cancer (23 ccRCC, 13 pRCC, and 4 chRCC) tissues, we developed a multinomial lasso classifier that selects 281 total analytes from over 27,000 detected molecular species that distinguishes all histological subtypes of RCC from normal kidney tissues with 84.5% accuracy. On the basis of independent test data reflecting distinct patient populations, the classifier achieves 85.4% and 91.2% accuracy on a Stanford test set (20 normal and 28 RCC) and a Baylor-UT Austin test set (16 normal and 41 RCC), respectively. The majority of the model's selected features show consistent trends across data sets affirming its stable performance, where the suppression of arachidonic acid metabolism is identified as a shared molecular feature of ccRCC and pRCC. CONCLUSION: Together, these results indicate that signatures derived from DESI-MSI combined with machine learning may be used to rapidly determine surgical margin status with accuracies that meet or exceed those reported for IFS.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer Early Detection, Version 1.2023.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for individuals with a prostate who opt to participate in an early detection program after receiving the appropriate counseling on the pros and cons. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines with regard to the testing protocol, use of multiparametric MRI, and management of negative biopsy results to optimize the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and minimize the detection of indolent disease.

The Association of Tissue Change and Treatment Success During High-intensity Focused Ultrasound Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tissue preservation strategies have been increasingly used for the management of localized prostate cancer. Focal ablation using ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) has demonstrated promising short and medium-term oncological outcomes. Advancements in HIFU therapy such as the introduction of tissue change monitoring (TCM) aim to further improve treatment efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between intraoperative TCM during HIFU focal therapy for localized prostate cancer and oncological outcomes 12 mo afterward. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Seventy consecutive men at a single institution with prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled. Men with prior treatment, metastases, or pelvic radiation were excluded to obtain a final cohort of 55 men. INTERVENTION: All men underwent HIFU focal therapy followed by magnetic resonance (MR)-fusion biopsy 12 mo later. Tissue change was quantified intraoperatively by measuring the backscatter of ultrasound waves during ablation. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Gleason grade group (GG) ≥2 cancer on postablation biopsy was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included GG ≥1 cancer, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores ≥3, and evidence of tissue destruction on post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A Student's t - test analysis was performed to evaluate the mean TCM scores and efficacy of ablation measured by histopathology. Multivariate logistic regression was also performed to identify the odds of residual cancer for each unit increase in the TCM score. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A lower mean TCM score within the region of the tumor (0.70 vs 0.97, p = 0.02) was associated with the presence of persistent GG ≥2 cancer after HIFU treatment. Adjusting for initial prostate-specific antigen, PI-RADS score, Gleason GG, positive cores, and age, each incremental increase of TCM was associated with an 89% reduction in the odds (odds ratio: 0.11, confidence interval: 0.01-0.97) of having residual GG ≥2 cancer on postablation biopsy. Men with higher mean TCM scores (0.99 vs 0.72, p = 0.02) at the time of treatment were less likely to have abnormal MRI (PI-RADS ≥3) at 12 mo postoperatively. Cases with high TCM scores also had greater tissue destruction measured on MRI and fewer visible lesions on postablation MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue change measured using TCM values during focal HIFU of the prostate was associated with histopathology and radiological outcomes 12 mo after the procedure. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at how well ultrasound changes of the prostate during focal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer predict patient outcomes. We found that greater tissue change measured by the HIFU device was associated with less residual cancer at 1 yr. This tool should be used to ensure optimal ablation of the cancer and may improve focal therapy outcomes in the future.

A Pilot Study of 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI for Biopsy Guidance in Patients with Suspected Prostate Cancer.

Targeting of lesions seen on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) improves prostate cancer (PC) detection at biopsy. However, 20%-65% of highly suspicious lesions on mpMRI (PI-RADS [Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System] 4 or 5) are false-positives (FPs), while 5%-10% of clinically significant PC (csPC) are missed. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and gastrin-releasing peptide receptors (GRPRs) are both overexpressed in PC. We therefore aimed to evaluate the potential of 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI for biopsy guidance in patients with suspected PC. Methods: A highly selective cohort of 13 men, aged 58.0 ± 7.1 y, with suspected PC (persistently high prostate-specific antigen [PSA] and PSA density) but negative or equivocal mpMRI results or negative biopsy were prospectively enrolled to undergo 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI. PET/MRI included whole-body and dedicated pelvic imaging after a delay of 20 min. All patients had targeted biopsy of any lesions seen on PET followed by standard 12-core biopsy. The SUVmax of suspected PC lesions was collected and compared with gold standard biopsy. Results: PSA and PSA density at enrollment were 9.8 ± 6.0 (range, 1.5-25.5) ng/mL and 0.20 ± 0.18 (range, 0.06-0.68) ng/mL2, respectively. Standardized systematic biopsy revealed a total of 14 PCs in 8 participants: 7 were csPC and 7 were nonclinically significant PC (ncsPC). 68Ga-PSMA11 identified 25 lesions, of which 11 (44%) were true-positive (TP) (5 csPC). 68Ga-RM2 showed 27 lesions, of which 14 (52%) were TP, identifying all 7 csPC and also 7 ncsPC. There were 17 concordant lesions in 11 patients versus 14 discordant lesions in 7 patients between 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET. Incongruent lesions had the highest rate of FP (12 FP vs. 2 TP). SUVmax was significantly higher for TP than FP lesions in delayed pelvic imaging for 68Ga-PSMA11 (6.49 ± 4.14 vs. 4.05 ± 1.55, P = 0.023) but not for whole-body images, nor for 68Ga-RM2. Conclusion: Our results show that 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI are feasible for biopsy guidance in suspected PC. Both radiopharmaceuticals detected additional clinically significant cancers not seen on mpMRI in this selective cohort. 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI identified all csPC confirmed at biopsy.

A Pilot Study of 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI for Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Response to High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Therapy.

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer (PC) using high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is gaining in popularity as it is noninvasive and associated with fewer side effects than standard whole-gland treatments. However, better methods to evaluate response to HIFU ablation are an unmet need. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and gastrin-releasing peptide receptors are both overexpressed in PC. In this study, we evaluated a novel approach of using both 68Ga-RM2 and 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/MRI in each patient before and after HIFU to assess the accuracy of target tumor localization and response to treatment. Methods: Fourteen men, 64.5 ± 8.0 y old (range, 48-78 y), with newly diagnosed PC were prospectively enrolled. Before HIFU, the patients underwent prostate biopsy, multiparametric MRI, 68Ga-PSMA11, and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI. Response to treatment was assessed at a minimum of 6 mo after HIFU with prostate biopsy (n = 13), as well as 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI (n = 14). The SUVmax and SUVpeak of known or suspected PC lesions were collected. Results: Pre-HIFU biopsy revealed 18 cancers, of which 14 were clinically significant (Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4). Multiparametric MRI identified 18 lesions; 14 of them were at least score 4 in the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System. 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI each showed 23 positive intraprostatic lesions; 21 were congruent in 13 patients, and 5 were incongruent in 5 patients. Before HIFU, 68Ga-PSMA11 identified all target tumors, whereas 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI missed 2 tumors. After HIFU, 68Ga-RM2 and 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/MRI both identified clinically significant residual disease in 1 patient. Three significant ipsilateral recurrent lesions were identified, whereas 1 was missed by 68Ga-PSMA11. The pretreatment level of prostate-specific antigen decreased significantly after HIFU, by 66%. Concordantly, the pretreatment SUVmax decreased significantly after HIFU for 68Ga-PSMA11 (P = 0.001) and 68Ga-RM2 (P = 0.005). Conclusion: This pilot study showed that 68Ga-PSMA11 and 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI identified the target tumor for HIFU in 100% and 86% of cases, respectively, and accurately verified response to treatment. PET may be a useful tool in the guidance and monitoring of treatment success in patients receiving focal therapy for PC. These preliminary findings warrant larger studies for validation.

Learn2Reg: Comprehensive Multi-Task Medical Image Registration Challenge, Dataset and Evaluation in the Era of Deep Learning.

Image registration is a fundamental medical image analysis task, and a wide variety of approaches have been proposed. However, only a few studies have comprehensively compared medical image registration approaches on a wide range of clinically relevant tasks. This limits the development of registration methods, the adoption of research advances into practice, and a fair benchmark across competing approaches. The Learn2Reg challenge addresses these limitations by providing a multi-task medical image registration data set for comprehensive characterisation of deformable registration algorithms. A continuous evaluation will be possible at https://learn2reg.grand-challenge.org. Learn2Reg covers a wide range of anatomies (brain, abdomen, and thorax), modalities (ultrasound, CT, MR), availability of annotations, as well as intra- and inter-patient registration evaluation. We established an easily accessible framework for training and validation of 3D registration methods, which enabled the compilation of results of over 65 individual method submissions from more than 20 unique teams. We used a complementary set of metrics, including robustness, accuracy, plausibility, and runtime, enabling unique insight into the current state-of-the-art of medical image registration. This paper describes datasets, tasks, evaluation methods and results of the challenge, as well as results of further analysis of transferability to new datasets, the importance of label supervision, and resulting bias. While no single approach worked best across all tasks, many methodological aspects could be identified that push the performance of medical image registration to new state-of-the-art performance. Furthermore, we demystified the common belief that conventional registration methods have to be much slower than deep-learning-based methods.

A review of artificial intelligence in prostate cancer detection on imaging.

A multitude of studies have explored the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in providing diagnostic support to radiologists, pathologists, and urologists in prostate cancer detection, risk-stratification, and management. This review provides a comprehensive overview of relevant literature regarding the use of AI models in (1) detecting prostate cancer on radiology images (magnetic resonance and ultrasound imaging), (2) detecting prostate cancer on histopathology images of prostate biopsy tissue, and (3) assisting in supporting tasks for prostate cancer detection (prostate gland segmentation, MRI-histopathology registration, MRI-ultrasound registration). We discuss both the potential of these AI models to assist in the clinical workflow of prostate cancer diagnosis, as well as the current limitations including variability in training data sets, algorithms, and evaluation criteria. We also discuss ongoing challenges and what is needed to bridge the gap between academic research on AI for prostate cancer and commercial solutions that improve routine clinical care.

Domain generalization for prostate segmentation in transrectal ultrasound images: A multi-center study.

Prostate biopsy and image-guided treatment procedures are often performed under the guidance of ultrasound fused with magnetic resonance images (MRI). Accurate image fusion relies on accurate segmentation of the prostate on ultrasound images. Yet, the reduced signal-to-noise ratio and artifacts (e.g., speckle and shadowing) in ultrasound images limit the performance of automated prostate segmentation techniques and generalizing these methods to new image domains is inherently difficult. In this study, we address these challenges by introducing a novel 2.5D deep neural network for prostate segmentation on ultrasound images. Our approach addresses the limitations of transfer learning and finetuning methods (i.e., drop in performance on the original training data when the model weights are updated) by combining a supervised domain adaptation technique and a knowledge distillation loss. The knowledge distillation loss allows the preservation of previously learned knowledge and reduces the performance drop after model finetuning on new datasets. Furthermore, our approach relies on an attention module that considers model feature positioning information to improve the segmentation accuracy. We trained our model on 764 subjects from one institution and finetuned our model using only ten subjects from subsequent institutions. We analyzed the performance of our method on three large datasets encompassing 2067 subjects from three different institutions. Our method achieved an average Dice Similarity Coefficient (Dice) of 94.0±0.03 and Hausdorff Distance (HD95) of 2.28 mm in an independent set of subjects from the first institution. Moreover, our model generalized well in the studies from the other two institutions (Dice: 91.0±0.03; HD95: 3.7 mm and Dice: 82.0±0.03; HD95: 7.1 mm). We introduced an approach that successfully segmented the prostate on ultrasound images in a multi-center study, suggesting its clinical potential to facilitate the accurate fusion of ultrasound and MRI images to drive biopsy and image-guided treatments.

Evaluation of post-ablation mpMRI as a predictor of residual prostate cancer after focal high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and PSA testing in follow-up after high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) focal therapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: A total of 73 men with localized prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled and underwent focal HIFU followed by per-protocol PSA and mpMRI with systematic plus targeted biopsies at 12 months after treatment. We evaluated the association between post-treatment mpMRI and PSA with disease persistence on the post-ablation biopsy. We also assessed post-treatment functional and oncological outcomes. RESULTS: Median age was 69 years (Interquartile Range (IQR): 66-74) and median PSA was 6.9 ng/dL (IQR: 5.3-9.9). Of 19 men with persistent GG ≥ 2 disease, 58% (11 men) had no visible lesions on MRI. In the 14 men with PIRADS 4 or 5 lesions, 7 (50%) had either no cancer or GG 1 cancer at biopsy. Men with false negative mpMRI findings had higher PSA density (0.16 vs. 0.07 ng/mL2, P = 0.01). No change occurred in the mean Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) survey scores (17.0 at baseline vs. 17.7 post-treatment, P = 0.75) or International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) (8.1 at baseline vs. 7.7 at 24 months, P = 0.81) after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent GG ≥ 2 cancer may occur after focal HIFU. mpMRI alone without confirmatory biopsy may be insufficient to rule out residual cancer, especially in patients with higher PSA density. Our study also validates previously published studies demonstrating preservation of urinary and sexual function after HIFU treatment.

Multi-institutional analysis of clinical and imaging risk factors for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions.

BACKGROUND: Most Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions do not contain clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa; grade group ≥2). This study was aimed at identifying clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived risk fac- tors that predict CSPCa in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions. METHODS: This study analyzed the detection of CSPCa in men who underwent MRI-targeted biopsy for PI-RADS 3 lesions. Multivariable logistic regression models with goodness-of-fit testing were used to identify variables associated with CSPCa. Receiver operating curves and decision curve analyses were used to estimate the clinical utility of a predictive model. RESULTS: Of the 1784 men reviewed, 1537 were included in the training cohort, and 247 were included in the validation cohort. The 309 men with CSPCa (17.3%) were older, had a higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, and had a greater likelihood of an anteriorly located lesion than men without CSPCa (p < .01). Multivariable analysis revealed that PSA density (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.85; p < .01), age (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07; p < .01), and a biopsy-naive status (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.38-2.44) were independently associated with CSPCa. A prior negative biopsy was negatively associated (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.50; p < .01). The application of the model to the validation cohort resulted in an area under the curve of 0.78. A predicted risk threshold of 12% could have prevented 25% of biopsies while detecting almost 95% of CSPCas with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 34%. CONCLUSIONS: For PI-RADS 3 lesions, an elevated PSA density, older age, and a biopsy-naive status were associated with CSPCa, whereas a prior negative biopsy was negatively associated. A predictive model could prevent PI-RADS 3 biopsies while missing few CSPCas. LAY SUMMARY: Among men with an equivocal lesion (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3) on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), those who are older, those who have a higher prostate-specific antigen density, and those who have never had a biopsy before are at higher risk for having clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) on subsequent biopsy. However, men with at least one negative biopsy have a lower risk of CSPCa. A new predictive model can greatly reduce the need to biopsy equivocal lesions noted on mpMRI while missing only a few cases of CSPCa.