Comparative performance of AI vs radiologists in pre-biopsy mpMRI prostate cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of multi-centre, multi-vendor studies

Alternative Title

Abstract

Background: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is the cornerstone for diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC), that is, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade >=2. The European Association of Urology (EAU) recommends its upfront implementation in biopsy-naive patients to guide prostate biopsy decision making (PMID 38614820). However, significant inter- and intra-observer reporting variability affects patient outcomes. Our objective was to systematically review and evaluate the comparative performance of AI vs radiologists in diagnosing prostate cancer from pre-biopsy prostate mpMRI. Method(s): Our systematic review PROSPERO ID: CRD420251037432] included MEDLINE, PMC, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and COCHRANE databases. Searching primary research published in 2010 and beyond yielded 6,389 records. After screening 3,747 articles, 137 underwent full-text review, with 3 meeting inclusion criteria-2 from database searches and 1 from grey literature. A meta-analysis using R assessed the diagnostic performance of the AI models, with area under the curve (AUC) as the primary outcome. Result(s): Three multi-center, multi-vendor intervention studies on prostate mpMRI compared AI characterization of csPC vs standard of care (SOC), that is, >=2 radiologists performing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data Systems (PI-RADS) version >=2 scoring. A meta-analysis, including 552 pre-biopsy patients, yielded pooled sensitivity 0.884 (95% CI, 0.75-0.98), specificity 0.681 (95% CI, 0.51-0.80), and AUC 0.837 (95% CI, 0.690-0.950) for the AI-principally supervised machine learning (ML) models. Model 1 (PMID 40016318) had a 95% sensitivity, 67% specificity and was non-inferior to SOC (AUC 0.91 vs 0.95; P = .044). Model 2 (PMID 37345961) reported 86%-91% sensitivity, 64%-75% specificity and was also non-inferior to SOC (comparable AUCs 0.82-0.86). Model 3 (PMID 33671533) showed 89% sensitivity and superiority over SOC (AUC 0.75 vs 0.47). Models 1 and 2 exhibited strong generalizability, with Model 2 aligning closely with PI-RADSv2 lesion characterization. Conclusion(s): The mpMRI-directed prostate biopsy pathway increases csPC detection and decreases PC negative biopsy rates. Adopting this implies a significant time and labor-intensive radiology workforce pressure. Our meta-analysis demonstrates how AI PC diagnostic accuracy is comparable to radiologists. This aids standardization, reduces diagnostic variability and radiologist workload.

Description

Citation

Publisher

License

Journal

Oncologist

Volume

30

Issue

PubMed ID

DOI

ISSN

EISSN

Collections