Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Model Based on MRI and Clinical Characteristics to Predict Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression

Purpose To validate a deep learning (DL) model for predicting the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) progression based on MRI and clinical parameters and compare it with established models. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1607 MRI scans of 1143 male patients (median age, 64 years; IQR, 59-68 years) undergoing MRI for suspicion of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (International Society of Urological Pathology grade > 1) between January 2012 and May 2022 who were negative for csPCa at baseline MRI. A DL model was developed using baseline MRI and clinical parameters (age, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, PSA density, and prostate volume) to predict the time to PCa progression (defined as csPCa diagnosis at follow-up). Internal and external testing was performed. The model's ability to predict progression to csPCa was assessed by Cox regression analyses. Predictive performance of the DL model up to 5 years after baseline MRI in comparison with the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) future-risk calculator, Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculator, and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) was assessed using the Harrell C-index. Optimized follow-up intervals were derived from Kaplan-Meier curves. Results DL scores predicted csPCa progression (internal cohort: hazard ratio [HR], 1.97 [95% CI: 1.61, 2.41; <i>P</i> < .001]; external cohort: HR, 1.32 [95% CI: 1.14, 1.55; <i>P</i> < .001]). The model identified a subgroup of patients (approximately 20%) with risks for csPCa of 3% or less, 8% or less, and 18% or less after 1-, 2-, and 4-year follow-up, respectively. DL scores had a C-index of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.63, 0.74) at internal testing and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.51, 0.61) at external testing, outperforming ERSPC and PCPT (both <i>P</i> < .001) at internal testing. Conclusion The DL model accurately predicted PCa progression and provided improved risk estimations, demonstrating its ability to aid in personalized follow-up for low-risk PCa. <b>Keywords:</b> MRI, Prostate Cancer, Deep Learning <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> ©RSNA, 2025.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Radiology Imaging Cancer
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1148/rycan.240078
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.63

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Model Based on MRI and Clinical Characteristics to Predict Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression

Henk G. van der Poel, Igle J. de Jong, Anindo Saha, Stijn W. T. P. J. Heijmink et al.
7 citations
Radiology Imaging Cancer
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
10.63
article

Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Model Based on MRI and Clinical Characteristics to Predict Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression

Henk G. van der Poel, Igle J. de Jong, Anindo Saha, Stijn W. T. P. J. Heijmink, Thomas C. Kwee, Stefan J. Fransen, HenkJan J. Huisman, Christian Roest, Pim van Leeuwen, Derya Yakar, Ivo G. Schoots
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Purpose To validate a deep learning (DL) model for predicting the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) progression based on MRI and clinical parameters and compare it with established models. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1607 MRI scans of 1143 male patients (median age, 64 years; IQR, 59-68 years) undergoing MRI for suspicion of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (International Society of Urological Pathology grade > 1) between January 2012 and May 2022 who were negative for csPCa at baseline MRI. A DL model was developed using baseline MRI and clinical parameters (age, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, PSA density, and prostate volume) to predict the time to PCa progression (defined as csPCa diagnosis at follow-up). Internal and external testing was performed. The model's ability to predict progression to csPCa was assessed by Cox regression analyses. Predictive performance of the DL model up to 5 years after baseline MRI in comparison with the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) future-risk calculator, Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculator, and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) was assessed using the Harrell C-index. Optimized follow-up intervals were derived from Kaplan-Meier curves. Results DL scores predicted csPCa progression (internal cohort: hazard ratio [HR], 1.97 [95% CI: 1.61, 2.41; <i>P</i> < .001]; external cohort: HR, 1.32 [95% CI: 1.14, 1.55; <i>P</i> < .001]). The model identified a subgroup of patients (approximately 20%) with risks for csPCa of 3% or less, 8% or less, and 18% or less after 1-, 2-, and 4-year follow-up, respectively. DL scores had a C-index of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.63, 0.74) at internal testing and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.51, 0.61) at external testing, outperforming ERSPC and PCPT (both <i>P</i> < .001) at internal testing. Conclusion The DL model accurately predicted PCa progression and provided improved risk estimations, demonstrating its ability to aid in personalized follow-up for low-risk PCa. <b>Keywords:</b> MRI, Prostate Cancer, Deep Learning <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> ©RSNA, 2025.

Radiology Imaging CancerVol. 7(1)
University Medical Center Groningen (NL), Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), Radboud University Medical Center (NL), The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL), Oncode Institute (NL), Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (NL), Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL)
Health~Holland, Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Astellas Pharma, Siemens Healthineers
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
10.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.