| Literature DB >> 32755355 |
Sherif Mehralivand1,2,3, Stephanie A Harmon4, Joanna H Shih5, Clayton P Smith3, Nathan Lay3, Burak Argun6, Sandra Bednarova7, Ronaldo Hueb Baroni8, Abdullah Erdem Canda9, Karabekir Ercan10, Rossano Girometti7, Ercan Karaarslan11, Ali Riza Kural6, Andrei S Purysko12, Soroush Rais-Bahrami13,14,15, Victor Martins Tonso8, Cristina Magi-Galluzzi16, Jennifer B Gordetsky17,18, Ricardo Silvestre E Silva Macarenco19, Maria J Merino20, Berrak Gumuskaya21, Yesim Saglican22, Stefano Sioletic23, Anne Y Warren24, Tristan Barrett25, Leonardo Bittencourt26,27, Mehmet Coskun28, Chris Knauss29, Yan Mee Law30, Ashkan A Malayeri31, Daniel J Margolis32, Jamie Marko31, Derya Yakar33, Bradford J Wood34, Peter A Pinto2, Peter L Choyke3, Ronald M Summers35, Baris Turkbey3.
Abstract
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.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; artificial intelligence; laparoscopic; multiparametric; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; robot-assisted
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32755355 PMCID: PMC8974983 DOI: 10.2214/AJR.19.22573
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol ISSN: 0361-803X Impact factor: 3.959