1
|
Anibal JT, Landa AJ, Hang NTT, Song MJ, Peltekian AK, Shin A, Huth HB, Hazen LA, Christou AS, Rivera J, Morhard RA, Bagci U, Li M, Bensoussan Y, Clifton DA, Wood BJ. Omicron detection with large language models and YouTube audio data. medRxiv 2024:2022.09.13.22279673. [PMID: 36172131 PMCID: PMC9516853 DOI: 10.1101/2022.09.13.22279673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Publicly available audio data presents a unique opportunity for the development of digital health technologies with large language models (LLMs). In this study, YouTube was mined to collect audio data from individuals with self-declared positive COVID-19 tests as well as those with other upper respiratory infections (URI) and healthy subjects discussing a diverse range of topics. The resulting dataset was transcribed with the Whisper model and used to assess the capacity of LLMs for detecting self-reported COVID-19 cases and performing variant classification. Following prompt optimization, LLMs achieved accuracies of 0.89, 0.97, respectively, in the tasks of identifying self-reported COVID-19 cases and other respiratory illnesses. The model also obtained a mean accuracy of 0.77 at identifying the variant of self-reported COVID-19 cases using only symptoms and other health-related factors described in the YouTube videos. In comparison with past studies, which used scripted, standardized voice samples to capture biomarkers, this study focused on extracting meaningful information from public online audio data. This work introduced novel design paradigms for pandemic management tools, showing the potential of audio data in clinical and public health applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James T Anibal
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
- Computational Health Informatics Lab, Oxford Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus Research Building, Headington, Oxford OX3 7DQ, United Kingdom
| | - Adam J Landa
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Nguyen T T Hang
- Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Tropical Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
| | - Miranda J Song
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Alec K Peltekian
- Department of Computer Science, McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Mudd Hall, 2233 Tech Drive, Third Floor, Evanston, IL, 60208 USA
| | - Ashley Shin
- National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD, 20894
| | - Hannah B Huth
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Lindsey A Hazen
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Anna S Christou
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Jocelyne Rivera
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Robert A Morhard
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Ulas Bagci
- Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 420 E Superior St, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
| | - Ming Li
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| | - Yael Bensoussan
- Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - David A Clifton
- Computational Health Informatics Lab, Oxford Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus Research Building, Headington, Oxford OX3 7DQ, United Kingdom
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Building 10, Room 1C341, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lee KH, Li M, Varble N, Negussie AH, Kassin MT, Arrichiello A, Carrafiello G, Hazen LA, Wakim PG, Li X, Xu S, Wood BJ. Smartphone Augmented Reality Outperforms Conventional CT Guidance for Composite Ablation Margins in Phantom Models. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024; 35:452-461.e3. [PMID: 37852601 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.10.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2022] [Revised: 09/23/2023] [Accepted: 10/08/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To develop and evaluate a smartphone augmented reality (AR) system for a large 50-mm liver tumor ablation with treatment planning for composite overlapping ablation zones. MATERIALS AND METHODS A smartphone AR application was developed to display tumor, probe, projected probe paths, ablated zones, and real-time percentage of the ablated target tumor volume. Fiducial markers were attached to phantoms and an ablation probe hub for tracking. The system was evaluated with tissue-mimicking thermochromic phantoms and gel phantoms. Four interventional radiologists performed 2 trials each of 3 probe insertions per trial using AR guidance versus computed tomography (CT) guidance approaches in 2 gel phantoms. Insertion points and optimal probe paths were predetermined. On Gel Phantom 2, serial ablated zones were saved and continuously displayed after each probe placement/adjustment, enabling feedback and iterative planning. The percentages of tumor ablated for AR guidance versus CT guidance, and with versus without display of recorded ablated zones, were compared among interventional radiologists with pairwise t-tests. RESULTS The means of percentages of tumor ablated for CT freehand and AR guidance were 36% ± 7 and 47% ± 4 (P = .004), respectively. The mean composite percentages of tumor ablated for AR guidance were 43% ± 1 (without) and 50% ± 2 (with display of ablation zone) (P = .033). There was no strong correlation between AR-guided percentage of ablation and years of experience (r < 0.5), whereas there was a strong correlation between CT-guided percentage of ablation and years of experience (r > 0.9). CONCLUSIONS A smartphone AR guidance system for dynamic iterative large liver tumor ablation was accurate, performed better than conventional CT guidance, especially for less experienced interventional radiologists, and enhanced more standardized performance across experience levels for ablation of a 50-mm tumor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katerina H Lee
- McGovern Medical School at UTHealth, Houston, Texas; Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ming Li
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Nicole Varble
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Philips Research North America, Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Ayele H Negussie
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Michael T Kassin
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Antonio Arrichiello
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Gianpaolo Carrafiello
- Department of Radiology, Foundation IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Lindsey A Hazen
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Paul G Wakim
- Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology Service, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Xiaobai Li
- Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology Service, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Sheng Xu
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yilmaz EC, Lin Y, Belue MJ, Harmon SA, Phelps TE, Merriman KM, Hazen LA, Garcia C, Johnson L, Lay NS, Toubaji A, Merino MJ, Patel KR, Parnes HL, Law YM, Wood BJ, Gurram S, Choyke PL, Pinto PA, Turkbey B. PI-RADS Version 2.0 Versus Version 2.1: Comparison of Prostate Cancer Gleason Grade Upgrade and Downgrade Rates From MRI-Targeted Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2024; 222:e2329964. [PMID: 37729551 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.23.29964] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND. Precise risk stratification through MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion-guided targeted biopsy (TBx) can guide optimal prostate cancer (PCa) management. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare PI-RADS version 2.0 (v2.0) and PI-RADS version 2.1 (v2.1) in terms of the rates of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group (GG) upgrade and downgrade from TBx to radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS. This study entailed a retrospective post hoc analysis of patients who underwent 3-T prostate MRI at a single institution from May 2015 to March 2023 as part of three prospective clinical trials. Trial participants who underwent MRI followed by MRI/US fusion-guided TBx and RP within a 1-year interval were identified. A single genitourinary radiologist performed clinical interpretations of the MRI examinations using PI-RADS v2.0 from May 2015 to March 2019 and PI-RADS v2.1 from April 2019 to March 2023. Upgrade and downgrade rates from TBx to RP were compared using chi-square tests. Clinically significant cancer was defined as ISUP GG2 or greater. RESULTS. The final analysis included 308 patients (median age, 65 years; median PSA density, 0.16 ng/mL2). The v2.0 group (n = 177) and v2.1 group (n = 131) showed no significant difference in terms of upgrade rate (29% vs 22%, respectively; p = .15), downgrade rate (19% vs 21%, p = .76), clinically significant upgrade rate (14% vs 10%, p = .27), or clinically significant downgrade rate (1% vs 1%, p > .99). The upgrade rate and downgrade rate were also not significantly different between the v2.0 and v2.1 groups when stratifying by index lesion PI-RADS category or index lesion zone, as well as when assessed only in patients without a prior PCa diagnosis (all p > .01). Among patients with GG2 or GG3 at RP (n = 121 for v2.0; n = 103 for v2.1), the concordance rate between TBx and RP was not significantly different between the v2.0 and v2.1 groups (53% vs 57%, p = .51). CONCLUSION. Upgrade and downgrade rates from TBx to RP were not significantly different between patients whose MRI examinations were clinically interpreted using v2.0 or v2.1. CLINICAL IMPACT. Implementation of the most recent PI-RADS update did not improve the incongruence in PCa grade assessment between TBx and surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enis C Yilmaz
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Yue Lin
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Mason J Belue
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Tim E Phelps
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Katie M Merriman
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Lindsey A Hazen
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Charisse Garcia
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Latrice Johnson
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Nathan S Lay
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Antoun Toubaji
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Maria J Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Krishnan R Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Howard L Parnes
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Yan Mee Law
- Department of Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Sandeep Gurram
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bldg 10, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Yilmaz EC, Shih JH, Belue MJ, Harmon SA, Phelps TE, Garcia C, Hazen LA, Toubaji A, Merino MJ, Gurram S, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Turkbey B. Prospective Evaluation of PI-RADS Version 2.1 for Prostate Cancer Detection and Investigation of Multiparametric MRI-derived Markers. Radiology 2023; 307:e221309. [PMID: 37129493 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221309] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
Background Data regarding the prospective performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 alone and in combination with quantitative MRI features for prostate cancer detection is limited. Purpose To assess lesion-based clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) rates in different PI-RADS version 2.1 categories and to identify MRI features that could improve csPCa detection. Materials and Methods This single-center prospective study included men with suspected or known prostate cancer who underwent multiparametric MRI and MRI/US-guided biopsy from April 2019 to December 2021. MRI scans were prospectively evaluated using PI-RADS version 2.1. Atypical transition zone (TZ) nodules were upgraded to category 3 if marked diffusion restriction was present. Lesions with an International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade of 2 or higher (range, 1-5) were considered csPCa. MRI features, including three-dimensional diameter, relative lesion volume (lesion volume divided by prostate volume), sphericity, and surface to volume ratio (SVR), were obtained from lesion contours delineated by the radiologist. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted at the lesion and participant levels to determine features associated with csPCa. Results In total, 454 men (median age, 67 years [IQR, 62-73 years]) with 838 lesions were included. The csPCa rates for lesions categorized as PI-RADS 1 (n = 3), 2 (n = 170), 3 (n = 197), 4 (n = 319), and 5 (n = 149) were 0%, 9%, 14%, 37%, and 77%, respectively. csPCa rates of PI-RADS 4 lesions were lower than PI-RADS 5 lesions (P < .001) but higher than PI-RADS 3 lesions (P < .001). Upgraded PI-RADS 3 TZ lesions were less likely to harbor csPCa compared with their nonupgraded counterparts (4% [one of 26] vs 20% [20 of 99], P = .02). Predictors of csPCa included relative lesion volume (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001), SVR (OR, 6.2; P = .02), and extraprostatic extension (EPE) scores of 2 (OR, 9.3; P < .001) and 3 (OR, 4.1; P = .02). Conclusion The rates of csPCa differed between consecutive PI-RADS categories of 3 and higher. MRI features, including lesion volume, shape, and EPE scores of 2 and 3, predicted csPCa. Upgrading of PI-RADS category 3 TZ lesions may result in unnecessary biopsies. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT03354416 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Goh in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enis C Yilmaz
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Joanna H Shih
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Mason J Belue
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Tim E Phelps
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Charisse Garcia
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Lindsey A Hazen
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Antoun Toubaji
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Maria J Merino
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Sandeep Gurram
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Peter L Choyke
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Bradford J Wood
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Peter A Pinto
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| | - Baris Turkbey
- From the Molecular Imaging Branch (E.C.Y., M.J.B., S.A.H., T.E.P., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (J.H.S.), Center for Interventional Oncology (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Department of Radiology, Clinical Center (C.G., L.A.H., B.J.W.), Laboratory of Pathology (A.T., M.J.M.), and Urologic Oncology Branch (S.G., P.A.P.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Phelps TE, Yilmaz EC, Harmon SA, Belue MJ, Shih JH, Garcia C, Hazen LA, Toubaji A, Merino MJ, Gurram S, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Turkbey B. Ipsilateral hemigland prostate biopsy may underestimate cancer burden in patients with unilateral mpMRI-visible lesions. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48:1079-1089. [PMID: 36526922 PMCID: PMC10765956 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-022-03775-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2022] [Revised: 12/07/2022] [Accepted: 12/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the cancer detection rates of reduced-core biopsy schemes in patients with unilateral mpMRI-visible intraprostatic lesions and to analyze the contribution of systematic biopsy cores in clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. METHODS 212 patients with mpMRI-visible unilateral intraprostatic lesions undergoing MRI/TRUS fusion-guided targeted biopsy (TBx) and systematic biopsy (SBx) were included. Cancer detection rates of TBx + SBx, as determined by highest Gleason Grade Group (GG), were compared to 3 reduced-core biopsy schemes: TBx alone, TBx + ipsilateral systematic biopsy (IBx; MRI-positive hemigland), and TBx + contralateral systematic biopsy (CBx; MRI-negative hemigland). Patient-level and biopsy core-level data were analyzed using descriptive statistics with confidence intervals. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify predictors of csPCa (≥ GG2) detected in MRI-negative hemiglands at p < 0.05. RESULTS Overall, 43.4% (92/212) of patients had csPCa and 66.0% (140/212) of patients had any PCa detected by TBx + SBx. Of patients with csPCa, 81.5% had exclusively ipsilateral involvement (MRI-positive), 7.6% had only contralateral involvement (MRI-negative), and 10.9% had bilateral involvement. The csPCa detection rates of reduced-core biopsy schemes were 35.4% (75/212), 40.1% (85/212), and 39.6% (84/212) for TBx alone, TBx + IBx, and TBx + CBx, respectively, with detection sensitivities of 81.5%, 92.4%, and 91.3% compared to TBx + SBx. CONCLUSION Reduced-core prostate biopsy strategies confined to the ipsilateral hemigland underestimate csPCa burden by at least 8% in patients with unilateral mpMRI-visible intraprostatic lesions. The combined TBx + SBx strategy maximizes csPCa detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tim E Phelps
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Enis C Yilmaz
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Mason J Belue
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Joanna H Shih
- Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Charisse Garcia
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Lindsey A Hazen
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Antoun Toubaji
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Maria J Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Sandeep Gurram
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1088, USA.
| |
Collapse
|