Explanation and Elaboration with Examples for CLEAR (CLEAR-E3): an EuSoMII Radiomics Auditing Group Initiative.

Overall quality of radiomics research has been reported as low in literature, which constitutes a major challenge to improve. Consistent, transparent, and accurate reporting is critical, which can be accomplished with systematic use of reporting guidelines. The CheckList for EvaluAtion of Radiomics research (CLEAR) was previously developed to assist authors in reporting their radiomic research and to assist reviewers in their evaluation. To take full advantage of CLEAR, further explanation and elaboration of each item, as well as literature examples, may be useful. The main goal of this work, Explanation and Elaboration with Examples for CLEAR (CLEAR-E3), is to improve CLEAR's usability and dissemination. In this international collaborative effort, members of the European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics-Radiomics Auditing Group searched radiomics literature to identify representative reporting examples for each CLEAR item. At least two examples, demonstrating optimal reporting, were presented for each item. All examples were selected from open-access articles, allowing users to easily consult the corresponding full-text articles. In addition to these, each CLEAR item's explanation was further expanded and elaborated. For easier access, the resulting document is available at https://radiomic.github.io/CLEAR-E3/ . As a complementary effort to CLEAR, we anticipate that this initiative will assist authors in reporting their radiomics research with greater ease and transparency, as well as editors and reviewers in reviewing manuscripts.Relevance statement Along with the original CLEAR checklist, CLEAR-E3 is expected to provide a more in-depth understanding of the CLEAR items, as well as concrete examples for reporting and evaluating radiomic research.Key points• As a complementary effort to CLEAR, this international collaborative effort aims to assist authors in reporting their radiomics research, as well as editors and reviewers in reviewing radiomics manuscripts.• Based on positive examples from the literature selected by the EuSoMII Radiomics Auditing Group, each CLEAR item explanation was further elaborated in CLEAR-E3.• The resulting explanation and elaboration document with examples can be accessed at  https://radiomic.github.io/CLEAR-E3/ .

Expect the unexpected: investigating discordant prostate MRI and biopsy results.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate discrepant radio-pathological outcomes in biopsy-naïve patients undergoing prostate MRI and to provide insights into the underlying causes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 2780 biopsy-naïve patients undergoing prostate MRI at a tertiary referral centre between October 2015 and June 2022. Exclusion criteria were biopsy not performed, indeterminate MRI findings (PI-RADS 3), and clinically insignificant PCa (Gleason score 3 + 3). Patients with discrepant findings between MRI and biopsy results were categorised into two groups: MRI-negative/Biopsy-positive and MRI-positive/Biopsy-negative (biopsy-positive defined as Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4). An expert uroradiologist reviewed discrepant cases, retrospectively re-assigning PI-RADS scores, identifying any missed MRI targets, and evaluating the quality of MRI scans. Potential explanations for discrepancies included MRI overcalls (including known pitfalls), benign pathology findings, and biopsy targeting errors. RESULTS: Patients who did not undergo biopsy (n = 1258) or who had indeterminate MRI findings (n = 204), as well as those with clinically insignificant PCa (n = 216), were excluded, with a total of 1102 patients analysed. Of these, 32/1,102 (3%) were classified as MRI-negative/biopsy-positive and 117/1102 (11%) as MRI-positive/biopsy-negative. In the MRI-negative/Biopsy-positive group, 44% of studies were considered non-diagnostic quality. Upon retrospective image review, target lesions were identified in 28% of cases. In the MRI-positive/Biopsy-negative group, 42% of cases were considered to be MRI overcalls, and 32% had an explanatory benign pathological finding, with biopsy targeting errors accounting for 11% of cases. CONCLUSION: Prostate MRI demonstrated a high diagnostic accuracy, with low occurrences of discrepant findings as defined. Common reasons for MRI-positive/Biopsy-negative cases included explanatory benign findings and MRI overcalls. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study highlights the importance of optimal prostate MRI image quality and expertise in reducing diagnostic errors, improving patient outcomes, and guiding appropriate management decisions in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. KEY POINTS: • Discrepancies between prostate MRI and biopsy results can occur, with higher numbers of MRI-positive/biopsy-negative relative to MRI-negative/biopsy-positive cases. • MRI-positive/biopsy-negative cases were mostly overcalls or explainable by benign biopsy findings. • In about one-third of MRI-negative/biopsy-positive cases, a target lesion was retrospectively identified.

Development and Validation of an Explainable Radiomics Model to Predict High-Aggressive Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter Radiomics Study Based on Biparametric MRI.

In the last years, several studies demonstrated that low-aggressive (Grade Group (GG) ≤ 2) and high-aggressive (GG ≥ 3) prostate cancers (PCas) have different prognoses and mortality. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop and externally validate a radiomic model to noninvasively classify low-aggressive and high-aggressive PCas based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI). To this end, 283 patients were retrospectively enrolled from four centers. Features were extracted from apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps and T2-weighted (T2w) sequences. A cross-validation (CV) strategy was adopted to assess the robustness of several classifiers using two out of the four centers. Then, the best classifier was externally validated using the other two centers. An explanation for the final radiomics signature was provided through Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) values and partial dependence plots (PDP). The best combination was a naïve Bayes classifier trained with ten features that reached promising results, i.e., an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.75 and 0.73 in the construction and external validation set, respectively. The findings of our work suggest that our radiomics model could help distinguish between low- and high-aggressive PCa. This noninvasive approach, if further validated and integrated into a clinical decision support system able to automatically detect PCa, could help clinicians managing men with suspicion of PCa.

METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS): a quality scoring tool for radiomics research endorsed by EuSoMII.

PURPOSE: To propose a new quality scoring tool, METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), to assess and improve research quality of radiomics studies. METHODS: We conducted an online modified Delphi study with a group of international experts. It was performed in three consecutive stages: Stage#1, item preparation; Stage#2, panel discussion among EuSoMII Auditing Group members to identify the items to be voted; and Stage#3, four rounds of the modified Delphi exercise by panelists to determine the items eligible for the METRICS and their weights. The consensus threshold was 75%. Based on the median ranks derived from expert panel opinion and their rank-sum based conversion to importance scores, the category and item weights were calculated. RESULT: In total, 59 panelists from 19 countries participated in selection and ranking of the items and categories. Final METRICS tool included 30 items within 9 categories. According to their weights, the categories were in descending order of importance: study design, imaging data, image processing and feature extraction, metrics and comparison, testing, feature processing, preparation for modeling, segmentation, and open science. A web application and a repository were developed to streamline the calculation of the METRICS score and to collect feedback from the radiomics community. CONCLUSION: In this work, we developed a scoring tool for assessing the methodological quality of the radiomics research, with a large international panel and a modified Delphi protocol. With its conditional format to cover methodological variations, it provides a well-constructed framework for the key methodological concepts to assess the quality of radiomic research papers. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A quality assessment tool, METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), is made available by a large group of international domain experts, with transparent methodology, aiming at evaluating and improving research quality in radiomics and machine learning. KEY POINTS: • A methodological scoring tool, METRICS, was developed for assessing the quality of radiomics research, with a large international expert panel and a modified Delphi protocol. • The proposed scoring tool presents expert opinion-based importance weights of categories and items with a transparent methodology for the first time. • METRICS accounts for varying use cases, from handcrafted radiomics to entirely deep learning-based pipelines. • A web application has been developed to help with the calculation of the METRICS score ( https://metricsscore.github.io/metrics/METRICS.html ) and a repository created to collect feedback from the radiomics community ( https://github.com/metricsscore/metrics ).

Large language models in radiology: fundamentals, applications, ethical considerations, risks, and future directions.

With the advent of large language models (LLMs), the artificial intelligence revolution in medicine and radiology is now more tangible than ever. Every day, an increasingly large number of articles are published that utilize LLMs in radiology. To adopt and safely implement this new technology in the field, radiologists should be familiar with its key concepts, understand at least the technical basics, and be aware of the potential risks and ethical considerations that come with it. In this review article, the authors provide an overview of the LLMs that might be relevant to the radiology community and include a brief discussion of their short history, technical basics, ChatGPT, prompt engineering, potential applications in medicine and radiology, advantages, disadvantages and risks, ethical and regulatory considerations, and future directions.

Reproducibility of radiomics quality score: an intra- and inter-rater reliability study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the total radiomics quality score (RQS) and the reproducibility of individual RQS items' score in a large multireader study. METHODS: Nine raters with different backgrounds were randomly assigned to three groups based on their proficiency with RQS utilization: Groups 1 and 2 represented the inter-rater reliability groups with or without prior training in RQS, respectively; group 3 represented the intra-rater reliability group. Thirty-three original research papers on radiomics were evaluated by raters of groups 1 and 2. Of the 33 papers, 17 were evaluated twice with an interval of 1 month by raters of group 3. Intraclass coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables, and Fleiss' and Cohen's kappa (k) statistics for categorical variables were used. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability was poor to moderate for total RQS (ICC 0.30-055, p < 0.001) and very low to good for item's reproducibility (k - 0.12 to 0.75) within groups 1 and 2 for both inexperienced and experienced raters. The intra-rater reliability for total RQS was moderate for the less experienced rater (ICC 0.522, p = 0.009), whereas experienced raters showed excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC 0.91-0.99, p < 0.001) between the first and second read. Intra-rater reliability on RQS items' score reproducibility was higher and most of the items had moderate to good intra-rater reliability (k - 0.40 to 1). CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility of the total RQS and the score of individual RQS items is low. There is a need for a robust and reproducible assessment method to assess the quality of radiomics research. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: There is a need for reproducible scoring systems to improve quality of radiomics research and consecutively close the translational gap between research and clinical implementation. KEY POINTS: • Radiomics quality score has been widely used for the evaluation of radiomics studies. • Although the intra-rater reliability was moderate to excellent, intra- and inter-rater reliability of total score and point-by-point scores were low with radiomics quality score. • A robust, easy-to-use scoring system is needed for the evaluation of radiomics research.

Thyroid Cancer Radiomics: Navigating Challenges in a Developing Landscape.

In a review from 2021 by Cao et al [...].

Radiomics for the identification of extraprostatic extension with prostate MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Extraprostatic extension (EPE) of prostate cancer (PCa) is predicted using clinical nomograms. Incorporating MRI could represent a leap forward, although poor sensitivity and standardization represent unsolved issues. MRI radiomics has been proposed for EPE prediction. The aim of the study was to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis of MRI-based radiomics approaches for EPE prediction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multiple databases were systematically searched for radiomics studies on EPE detection up to June 2022. Methodological quality was appraised according to Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool and radiomics quality score (RQS). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was pooled to estimate predictive accuracy. A random-effects model estimated overall effect size. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with I2 value. Publication bias was evaluated with a funnel plot. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included, showing limitations in study design and methodological quality (median RQS 10/36), with high statistical heterogeneity. Pooled AUC for EPE identification was 0.80. In subgroup analysis, test-set and cross-validation-based studies had pooled AUC of 0.85 and 0.89 respectively. Pooled AUC was 0.72 for deep learning (DL)-based and 0.82 for handcrafted radiomics studies and 0.79 and 0.83 for studies with multiple and single scanner data, respectively. Finally, models with the best predictive performance obtained using radiomics features showed pooled AUC of 0.82, while those including clinical data of 0.76. CONCLUSION: MRI radiomics-powered models to identify EPE in PCa showed a promising predictive performance overall. However, methodologically robust, clinically driven research evaluating their diagnostic and therapeutic impact is still needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Radiomics might improve the management of prostate cancer patients increasing the value of MRI in the assessment of extraprostatic extension. However, it is imperative that forthcoming research prioritizes confirmation studies and a stronger clinical orientation to solidify these advancements. KEY POINTS: • MRI radiomics deserves attention as a tool to overcome the limitations of MRI in prostate cancer local staging. • Pooled AUC was 0.80 for the 13 included studies, with high heterogeneity (84.7%, p < .001), methodological issues, and poor clinical orientation. • Methodologically robust radiomics research needs to focus on increasing MRI sensitivity and bringing added value to clinical nomograms at patient level.

Prediction of placenta accreta spectrum in patients with placenta previa using a clinical, US and MRI combined model: A retrospective study with external validation.

PURPOSE: To build and validate a predictive model of placental accreta spectrum (PAS) in patients with placenta previa (PP) combining clinical risk factors (CRF) with US and MRI signs. METHOD: Our retrospective study included patients with PP from two institutions. All patients underwent US and MRI examinations for suspicion of PAS. CRF consisting of maternal age, cesarean section number, smoking and hypertension were retrieved. US and MRI signs suggestive of PAS were evaluated. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify CRF and/or US and MRI signs associated with PAS considering histology as the reference standard. A nomogram was created using significant CRF and imaging signs at multivariate analysis, and its diagnostic accuracy was measured using the area under the binomial ROC curve (AUC), and the cut-off point was determined by Youden's J statistic. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients were enrolled from two institutions. Independent predictors of PAS included in the nomogram were: 1) smoking and number of previous CS among CRF; 2) loss of the retroplacental clear space at US; 3) intraplacental dark bands, focal interruption of the myometrial border and placental bulging at MRI. A PAS-prediction nomogram was built including these parameters and an optimal cut-off of 14.5 points was identified, showing the highest sensitivity (91%) and specificity (88%) with an AUC value of 0.95 (AUC of 0.80 in the external validation cohort). CONCLUSION: A nomogram-based model combining CRF with US and MRI signs might help to predict PAS in PP patients, with MRI contributing more than US as imaging evaluation.

Dissemination of endometrial cancer MRI staging guidelines among young radiologists: an ESUR Junior Network survey.

OBJECTIVES: Imaging guidelines could play an important role in the training of radiologists, but the extent of their adoption in residency programs is unclear. With this survey, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Junior Network aimed to assess the dissemination of the ESUR guidelines on endometrial cancer MRI staging (EC-ESUR guidelines) among young radiologists. METHODS: An online questionnaire targeted to last year radiology residents and radiologists in the first year of their career was designed. It included 24 questions, structured in 4 sections (i.e., background, general, acquisition protocol, interpretation, and reporting). The survey was active between April and May 2022, accepting answers worldwide. Answers were solicited with a social media campaign and with the support of national scientific societies. Subgroup analysis was performed based on variables such as subspecialty of interest and number of EC-ESUR guidelines consultations using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: In total, 118 participants completed the questionnaire, of which 94 (80%) were from Europe and 46 (39%) with a special interest in urogenital radiology. Overall, 68 (58%) stated that the guidelines were not part of their residency teaching programs while 32 (27%) had never even consulted the guidelines. Interest in urogenital radiology as a subspecialty and EC-ESUR guidelines consultations were associated with greater confidence in supervising scan acquisition, interpreting, and reporting EC MRI staging exams. CONCLUSION: Four years after publication, the adoption of EC-ESUR guidelines in residency programs is heterogeneously low. Despite a possible selection bias, our findings indicate that active promotion of EC-ESUR guidelines is required. KEY POINTS: • The adoption of ESUR guidelines on endometrial cancer in radiology residency programs is heterogeneous. • Almost one third of respondents stated they had never even consulted the guidelines. • Confidence toward guidelines was higher in those who were exposed to more endometrial cancer MRI staging scans. • Reading the guidelines was associated with a greater confidence in protocol acquisition, interpretation, and reporting. • Active efforts to promote their dissemination are required.

Prediction of 2-[18F]FDG PET-CT SUVmax for Adrenal Mass Characterization: A CT Radiomics Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Indeterminate adrenal masses (AM) pose a diagnostic challenge, and 2-[18F]FDG PET-CT serves as a problem-solving tool. Aim of this study was to investigate whether CT radiomics features could be used to predict the 2-[18F]FDG SUVmax of AM. METHODS: Patients with AM on 2-[18F]FDG PET-CT scan were grouped based on iodine contrast injection as CT contrast-enhanced (CE) or CT unenhanced (NCE). Two-dimensional segmentations of AM were manually obtained by multiple operators on CT images. Image resampling and discretization (bin number = 16) were performed. 919 features were calculated using PyRadiomics. After scaling, unstable, redundant, and low variance features were discarded. Using linear regression and the Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection technique, a CT radiomics synthetic value (RadSV) was obtained. The correlation between CT RadSV and 2-[18F]FDG SUVmax was assessed with Pearson test. RESULTS: A total of 725 patients underwent PET-CT from April 2020 to April 2021. In 150 (21%) patients, a total of 179 AM (29 bilateral) were detected. Group CE consisted of 84 patients with 108 AM (size = 18.1 ± 4.9 mm) and Group NCE of 66 patients with 71 AM (size = 18.5 ± 3.8 mm). In both groups, 39 features were selected. No statisticallyf significant correlation between CT RadSV and 2-[18F]FDG SUVmax was found (Group CE, r = 0.18 and p = 0.058; Group NCE, r = 0.13 and p = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: It might not be feasible to predict 2-[18F]FDG SUVmax of AM using CT RadSV. Its role as a problem-solving tool for indeterminate AM remains fundamental.

Extraprostatic incidental findings on prostate mpMRI: A pictorial review from the ESUR junior network.

The role of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in prostate cancer setting is increasingly consolidated and, as a result, its usage in clinical practice is in exponential growth. However, beyond the prostate gland, several key structures are included in the field of view of mpMRI scans. Consequently, various extra-prostatic incidental findings (IFs) belonging to different anatomical systems can be accidentally recognized. Therefore, it is mandatory for a radiologist to be familiar with the wide range of pathologies potentially encountered, to guide management and avoid patient anxiety and costs due to additional work-up prompted by clinically insignificant extra-prostatic findings. With this pictorial review, we aim to illustrate a wide range of IFs that can be detected when performing mpMRI of the prostate, focusing on their imaging characteristics, differential diagnosis, and clinical relevance. Additionally, we propose the CheckDEEP, the Checklist for DEtection of ExtraProstatic findings, to be used for a thorough evaluation of target areas within each anatomical system.

Segmentation methods applied to MRI-derived radiomic analysis for the prediction of placenta accreta spectrum in patients with placenta previa.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the performance of different manual segmentation methods of placenta MR images for predicting Placenta Accreta Spectrum (PAS) disorders in patients with placenta previa (PP) using a Machine Learning (ML) Radiomics analysis. METHODS: 64 patients (n=41 with PAS and n= 23 without PAS) with PP who underwent MRI examination for suspicion of PAS were retrospectively selected. All MRI examinations were acquired on a 1.5 T using T2-weighted (T2w) sequences on axial, sagittal and coronal planes. Ten different manual segmentation methods were performed on sagittal placental T2-weighted images obtaining five sets of 2D regions of interest (ROIs) and five sets of 3D volumes of interest (VOIs) from each patient. In detail, ROIs and VOIs were positioned on the following areas: placental tissue, retroplacental myometrium, cervix, placenta with underneath myometrium, placenta with underneath myometrium and cervix. For feature stability testing, the same process was repeated on 30 randomly selected placental MRI examinations by two additional radiologists, working independently and blinded to the original segmentation. Radiomic features were extracted from all available ROIs and VOIs. 100 iterations of 5-fold cross-validation with nested feature selection, based on recursive feature elimination, were subsequently run on each ROI/VOI to identify the best-performing method to classify instances correctly. RESULTS: Among the segmentation methods, the best performance in predicting PAS was obtained by the VOIs covering the retroplacental myometrium (Mean validation score: 0.761, standard deviation: 0.116). CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results show that the VOI including the retroplacental myometrium using T2w images seems to be the best method when segmenting images for the development of ML radiomics predictive models to identify PAS in patients with PP.

MR image quality in local staging of prostate cancer: Role of PI-QUAL in the detection of extraprostatic extension.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of prostate MRI image quality by means of the Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score, on the identification of extraprostatic extension of disease (EPE), predicted using the EPE Grade Score, Likert Scale Score (LSS) and a clinical nomogram (MSKCCn). METHODS: We retrospectively included 105 patients with multiparametric prostate MRI prior to prostatectomy. Two radiologists evaluated image quality using PI-QUAL (≥4 was considered high quality) in consensus. All cases were also scored using the EPE Grade, the LSS, and the MSKCCn (dichotomized). Inter-rater reproducibility for each score was also assessed. Accuracy was calculated for the entire population and by image quality, considering two thresholds for EPE Grade (≥2 and = 3) and LSS (≥3 and ≥ 4) and using McNemar's test for comparison. RESULTS: Overall, 66 scans achieved high quality. The accuracy of EPE Grade ranged from 0.695 to 0.743, while LSS achieved values between 0.705 and 0.733. Overall sensitivity for the radiological scores (range = 0.235-0.529) was low irrespective of the PI-QUAL score, while specificity was higher (0.775-0.986). The MSKCCn achieved an AUC of 0.76, outperforming EPE Grade (=3 threshold) in studies with suboptimal image quality (0.821 vs 0.564, p = 0.016). EPE Grade (=3 threshold) accuracy was also better in high image quality studies (0.849 vs 0.564, p = 0.001). Reproducibility was good to excellent overall (95 % Confidence Interval range = 0.782-0.924). CONCLUSION: Assessing image quality by means of PI-QUAL is helpful in the evaluation of EPE, as a scan of low quality makes its performance drop compared to clinical staging tools.

CheckList for EvaluAtion of Radiomics research (CLEAR): a step-by-step reporting guideline for authors and reviewers endorsed by ESR and EuSoMII.

Even though radiomics can hold great potential for supporting clinical decision-making, its current use is mostly limited to academic research, without applications in routine clinical practice. The workflow of radiomics is complex due to several methodological steps and nuances, which often leads to inadequate reporting and evaluation, and poor reproducibility. Available reporting guidelines and checklists for artificial intelligence and predictive modeling include relevant good practices, but they are not tailored to radiomic research. There is a clear need for a complete radiomics checklist for study planning, manuscript writing, and evaluation during the review process to facilitate the repeatability and reproducibility of studies. We here present a documentation standard for radiomic research that can guide authors and reviewers. Our motivation is to improve the quality and reliability and, in turn, the reproducibility of radiomic research. We name the checklist CLEAR (CheckList for EvaluAtion of Radiomics research), to convey the idea of being more transparent. With its 58 items, the CLEAR checklist should be considered a standardization tool providing the minimum requirements for presenting clinical radiomics research. In addition to a dynamic online version of the checklist, a public repository has also been set up to allow the radiomics community to comment on the checklist items and adapt the checklist for future versions. Prepared and revised by an international group of experts using a modified Delphi method, we hope the CLEAR checklist will serve well as a single and complete scientific documentation tool for authors and reviewers to improve the radiomics literature.

Using a Recurrent Neural Network To Inform the Use of Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) and PSA Density for Dynamic Monitoring of the Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression on Active Surveillance.

The global uptake of prostate cancer (PCa) active surveillance (AS) is steadily increasing. While prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) is an important baseline predictor of PCa progression on AS, there is a scarcity of recommendations on its use in follow-up. In particular, the best way of measuring PSAD is unclear. One approach would be to use the baseline gland volume (BGV) as a denominator in all calculations throughout AS (nonadaptive PSAD, PSADNA), while another would be to remeasure gland volume at each new magnetic resonance imaging scan (adaptive PSAD, PSADA). In addition, little is known about the predictive value of serial PSAD in comparison to PSA. We applied a long short-term memory recurrent neural network to an AS cohort of 332 patients and found that serial PSADNA significantly outperformed both PSADA and PSA for follow-up prediction of PCa progression because of its high sensitivity. Importantly, while PSADNA was superior in patients with smaller glands (BGV ≤55 ml), serial PSA was better in men with larger prostates of >55 ml. Patient summary: Repeat measurements of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA density (PSAD) are the mainstay of active surveillance in prostate cancer. Our study suggests that in patients with a prostate gland of 55 ml or smaller, PSAD measurements are a better predictor of tumour progression, whereas men with a larger gland may benefit more from PSA monitoring.

MRI Liver Imaging Integrated with Texture Analysis in Native Liver Survivor Patients with Biliary Atresia after Kasai Portoenterostomy: Correlation with Medical Outcome after Surgical Treatment.

Kasai portoenterostomy (KP) plays a crucial role in the treatment of biliary atresia (BA). The aim is to correlate MRI quantitative findings of native liver survivor BA patients after KP with a medical outcome. Thirty patients were classified as having ideal medical outcomes (Group 1; n = 11) if laboratory parameter values were in the normal range and there was no evidence of chronic liver disease complications; otherwise, they were classified as having nonideal medical outcomes (Group 2; n = 19). Liver and spleen volumes, portal vein diameter, liver mean, and maximum and minimum ADC values were measured; similarly, ADC and T2-weighted textural parameters were obtained using ROI analysis. The liver volume was significantly (p = 0.007) lower in Group 2 than in Group 1 (954.88 ± 218.31 cm3 vs. 1140.94 ± 134.62 cm3); conversely, the spleen volume was significantly (p < 0.001) higher (555.49 ± 263.92 cm3 vs. 231.83 ± 70.97 cm3). No differences were found in the portal vein diameter, liver ADC values, or ADC and T2-weighted textural parameters. In conclusion, significant quantitative morpho-volumetric liver and spleen abnormalities occurred in BA patients with nonideal medical outcomes after KP, but no significant microstructural liver abnormalities detectable by ADC values and ADC and T2-weighted textural parameters were found between the groups.