To Evaluate an MRI-based Optimized Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway Powered by Artificial Intelligence
For patients and families
In plain language
An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.
- What is being studied
- The protocol lists: AI modal, Standard review.
- Who it may be relevant to
- Registry conditions: Prostate Cancer. Basic parameters: from 18 years · Male.
- What needs checking
- Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
- Where it takes place
- Hong Kong
- Next step
- Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Unsure about the terms? Read our patient guide →
Official title
ProstateAI - A Prospective Paired Validating Cohort Study to Evaluate an MRI-based Optimized Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway Powered by Artificial Intelligence
Overview
It is a prospective paired-cohort study for diagnostic test evaluation. The study aim to determine the accuracy of AI review and investigate whether AI review could detect MRI visible significant cancer as effective as radiologist review. MRI image of about 368 men recommended for biopsy will be reviewed by an AI model and an experienced radiologist, respectively. AI review (index) and radiologist review (standard) will be blinded to each other, while biopsy urologists will be well-informed of the findings of both AI review and radiologist review and make personalized biopsy plan by combining both findings. The pathological results of MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy (reference) will serve as the gold standard to assess the diagnostic accuracy.
Detailed description
ProstateAI is a prospective paired-cohort study for diagnostic test evaluation. ProstateAI will determine the accuracy of AI review and investigate whether AI review could detect MRI visible significant cancer as effective as radiologist review. MRI image of about 368 men recommended for biopsy will be reviewed by an AI model and an experienced radiologist, respectively. AI review (index) and radiologist review (standard) will be blinded to each other, while biopsy urologists will be well-informed of the findings of both AI review and radiologist review and make personalized biopsy plan by combining both findings. The pathological results of MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy (reference) will serve as the gold standard to assess the diagnostic accuracy.
Interventions
- Diagnostic test AI modal
The MRI image will be reviewed by radiologist and AI model(s) respectively. The urologist will combine the results of the two approaches to optimize the biopsy strategy which is expected to result in more accurate diagnosis. - Diagnostic test Standard review
The MRI image will be reviewed by radiologist.
Primary outcome measures
- Prostate Cancer detection rate of ISUP grade group ≥2 [Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year]
Secondary outcome measures (1)
- Diagnosis of any grade of prostate cancer [Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year]
Eligibility criteria
Inclusion criteria
- Patients recommended for prostate biopsy for diagnosis or re-assessment.
- Men at least 18 years or over
- Patients with prostate MRI image eligible for radiologist review and AI review.
- Patient Informed Consent is signed.
Exclusion criteria
- Patient contraindicated to prostate biopsy
- Patient failed to complete the biopsy procedure
Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.
Healthy volunteers: No
Study design
- Allocation
- Non-randomized
- Model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Primary purpose
- Diagnostic
Study locations
Hong Kong · 1 center
- Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong — Hong Kong
Publications
- Halabi S, Lin CY, Kelly WK, Fizazi KS, Moul JW, Kaplan EB, Morris MJ, Small EJ. Updated prognostic model for predicting overall survival in first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Mar 1;32(7):671-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.3696. Epub 2014 Jan 21. PMID 24449231
- Ilic D, Djulbegovic M, Jung JH, Hwang EC, Zhou Q, Cleves A, Agoritsas T, Dahm P. Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018 Sep 5;362:k3519. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k3519. PMID 30185521
- Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Emberton M; PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1. Epub 2017 J PMID 28110982
- Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, Fanti S, Fossati N, Gandaglia G, Gillessen S, Grivas N, Grummet J, Henry AM, van der Kwast TH, Lam TB, Lardas M, Liew M, Mason MD, Moris L, Oprea-Lager DE, van der Poel HG, Rouviere O, Schoots IG, Tilki D, Wiegel T, Willemse PM, Cornford P. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part PMID 33172724
- Wei JT, Barocas D, Carlsson S, Coakley F, Eggener S, Etzioni R, Fine SW, Han M, Kim SK, Kirkby E, Konety BR, Miner M, Moses K, Nissenberg MG, Pinto PA, Salami SS, Souter L, Thompson IM, Lin DW. Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline Part II: Considerations for a Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2023 Jul;210(1):54-63. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003492. Epub 2023 Apr 25. PMID 37096575
- Bass EJ, Pantovic A, Connor MJ, Loeb S, Rastinehad AR, Winkler M, Gabe R, Ahmed HU. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy techniques compared to transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022 Feb;25(2):174-179. doi: 10.1038/s41391-021-00449-7. Epub 2021 Sep 21. PMID 34548624
- Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H, Stamatakis L, Vourganti S, Nix J, Hoang AN, Walton-Diaz A, Shuch B, Weintraub M, Kruecker J, Amalou H, Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013 Nov;64(5):713-719. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.20 PMID 23787357
- Wegelin O, van Melick HHE, Hooft L, Bosch JLHR, Reitsma HB, Barentsz JO, Somford DM. Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique? Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):517-531. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016. PMID 27568655
Identifiers
NCT: NCT06360523 · CRE-2024.141