To establish machine learning(ML) models for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) using multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), texture analysis (TA), dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) quantitative analysis and clinical parameters and to evaluate the stability of these models in internal and temporal validation. The dataset of 194 men was split into training (n = 135) and internal validation (n = 59) cohorts, and a temporal dataset (n = 58) was used for evaluation. The lesions with Gleason score ≥ 7 were defined as csPC. Logistic regression (LR), stepwise regression (SR), classical decision tree (cDT), conditional inference tree (CIT), random forest (RF) and support vector machine (SVM) models were established by combining mpMRI-TA, DCE-MRI and clinical parameters and validated by internal and temporal validation using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Delong’s method. Eight variables were determined as important predictors for csPC, with the first three related to texture features derived from the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping. RF, LR and SR models yielded larger and more stable area under the ROC curve values (AUCs) than other models. In the temporal validation, the sensitivity was lower than that of the internal validation (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and AUC (p > 0.05). Each machine learning model in this study has good classification ability for csPC. Compared with internal validation, the sensitivity of each machine learning model in temporal validation was reduced, but the specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV and AUCs remained stable at a good level. The RF, LR and SR models have better classification performance in the imaging-based diagnosis of csPC, and ADC texture-related parameters are of the highest importance.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and metaanalysis to estimate the diagnostic performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) for detection of prostate cancer (PCa).MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two independent reviewers performed a systematic review of the literature published from January 2000 to July 2017 by using predefined search terms. The standard of pathologic reference was established at prostatectomy or prostate biopsy. The numbers of true- and false-positive and true- and false-negative results were extracted. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used to assess the quality of the selected studies. Statistical analysis included pooling of diagnostic accuracy, meta-regression, subgroup analysis, head-to-head comparison, and identification of publication bias.RESULTS. Thirty-three studies were used for general data pooling. The overall sensitivity was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.85), and overall specificity was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.69-0.84). As for clinically relevant PCa, bpMRI maintained high diagnostic value (AUC, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88). There was no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.67). From head-to-head comparison for detection of PCa, multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) had significantly higher pooled sensitivity (0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93) than did bpMRI (0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90) (p = 0.01). However, the pooled specificity values were not significantly different (mpMRI, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.58-0.95]; bpMRI, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.64-0.96]; p = 0.82).CONCLUSION. The results of this meta-analysis suggest that bpMRI has high diagnostic accuracy in the detection of PCa and maintains a high detection rate for clinically relevant PCa. However, owing to high heterogeneity among the included studies, caution is needed in applying the results of the meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to investigate the performance of biparametric MRI texture analysis (TA) in detecting and evaluating high-grade prostate cancer in zone-specific regions.MATERIALS AND METHODSA retrospective study included 184 consecutively registered biopsy-naive patients in whom prostate cancer was suspected who were undergoing multiparametric prostate MRI. MR images were scored and evaluated by two readers using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) and biparametric MRI TA in separate sessions. Interobserver agreement on PI-RADSv2 score and textural parameters of biparametric MRI was evaluated. The logistic regression model based on TA was built for different zones of the prostate. ROC analysis was used to compare the TA-based model with other parameters alone. The correlation of each parameter with Gleason score of high-grade prostate cancer was also assessed.RESULTSReader reliability ranged from moderate to good for PI-RADSv2 (Cohen κ = 0.525-0.616) and from good to excellent for textural metrics (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.745-0.925). Diagnostic performance was significantly improved by use of the TA-based model (transition zone AUC, 0.87; peripheral zone AUC, 0.89) in comparison with PI-RADSv2 and other texture parameters alone. For the transition zone, entropy had moderate to good correlation with the Gleason score of high-grade prostate cancer (r = 0.562, p = 0.004). In the peripheral zone, entropy (r = 0.614, p = 0.003) and inertia (r = 0.663, p = 0.002) had moderate to good correlations with Gleason score.CONCLUSIONThe results of this clinical study indicate that a TA-based model that includes biparametric MRI can be used for identifying high-grade prostate cancer and that specific parameters extracted from TA may be additional tools for assessing tumor aggressiveness.